Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates 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 producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. 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 the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in 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 Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves 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 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, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
