Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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". Context, however, is key.
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 above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries 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, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
