Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in 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.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join 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 with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported 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 the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
