Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause 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 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 darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version 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, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
