Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, 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". 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 Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, 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 convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, 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 returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
