Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over 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 commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite 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. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, 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 measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led 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 seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
