Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. 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 the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party 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 intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over 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 low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, 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 on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
