Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing 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.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement 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 stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
