Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for 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: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge 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, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
