Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, 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 are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention 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 concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply 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 similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
