Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall 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 speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified 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 now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, 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 most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views 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 believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging 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 ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
