Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick 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.
And yet, 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, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
