Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although 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 addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters 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 the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments 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 polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into 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 with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to 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 growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
