Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses 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 of 2018, departing from his agreed text 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 above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid 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. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 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. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise 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 which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
