Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
