Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage 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 how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand 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 future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
