Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause 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". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises 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 suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses 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 between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining 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 joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down 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.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
