Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit 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 his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in 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 Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways 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.
