Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates 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 addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for 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. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators 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, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options 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.
