🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.

The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates

In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.

Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an 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 ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.

Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.

David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding 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 a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.

Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.

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

1. Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.

However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past

All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.

Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory

The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.

It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.