🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.

In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.

The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates

Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.

A Lid That Rattles on Europe

Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, 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 micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals

Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.

The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines 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, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Fundamental Doubts

However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.

Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.

An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.

But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018

This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.

It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.