Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, 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. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
