Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies 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 risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” 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, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain 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 with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
