Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a 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.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water 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 government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
