Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts 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 most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number 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 party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words 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 himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
