Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost 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 are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
