Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea 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 premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested 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, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within 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 letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
