Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. 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 the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly 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 thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, 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 Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
