Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue 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 the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact 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 explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
