Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured 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 Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent 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 reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
