Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches 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 of 2018, departing 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 pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an 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 the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental 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 America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
