🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues

Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

Pressure Building on Europe

However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.

It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past

This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.

Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space 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 seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal 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.