Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining 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, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates 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. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, 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 America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
