🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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.

In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.

The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues

In the years since, much has happened, not least to 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 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number 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 be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.

The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.

While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.

A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.

It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.