Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed 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 with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding 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 voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
