🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates

Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y 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

However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut 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 to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.

David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.

Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
2. Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past

All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, 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 Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.

It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.