Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact 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 prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
