Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. 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.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national 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 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. 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 are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
