Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text 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 key constituencies above the pro-European instincts 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 would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up 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.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
