Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall 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 having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister 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, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
