Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying 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 over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
