Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During 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 leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool 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 scale of the damage, 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. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory 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 on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
