Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, 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, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding 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 supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. 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 note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
