Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman 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 Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts 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 consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in 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 agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been 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 regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.