Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
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". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number 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 Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists 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, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers 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 the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
