Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates 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 his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in 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 the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
