Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way 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 of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to 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 is still his only real achievement.
And yet, 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, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- 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 the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
