Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
