Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely 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, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & 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 previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts 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 several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
