Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely 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, 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 remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK 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 caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, 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, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
