Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "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 issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
