Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman 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 in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade 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, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
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 minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “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 encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, 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 note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
