Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU 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 his primary goal 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 significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- 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 have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding 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 and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words 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 himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
