Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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 deeply polarized period in 2018, straying 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 over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates 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 party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national 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 ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
