Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to 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 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” 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 survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts 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 significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
