Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK 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 Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
