Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, 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 Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts 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 three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
