🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, 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.

During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way 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 of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.

The Shift in Position & Closed Debates

In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, 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 following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
2. 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 have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018

All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder

The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. 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.