Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite 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 wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering 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 that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps 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 wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
