Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on 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.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs 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.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering 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 his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
