Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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 always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring 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 re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation 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 his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in 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 sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and 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 most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
