Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for 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 having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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 minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance 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 has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
