Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area 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, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 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. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
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 EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
