Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, 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.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit 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 seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
