Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests 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 Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining 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, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.