Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade 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 many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be 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 ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national 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 relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in 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 Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
