Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met 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 addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements 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 is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention 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 the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
