Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade 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 key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British 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 that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates 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 the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
