Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period 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 was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, 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. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, 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, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & 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 remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior 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 regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
