Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates 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 addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises 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 survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, 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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation 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
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, 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 European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
