Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words 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 addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script 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 over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area 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, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
