Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in 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. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “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 foster 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 Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. 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 are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
