Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While 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 once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric 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 how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that 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 believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. 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 Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals 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 that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
