Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, 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.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth 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, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
