Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
