Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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 of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – 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 of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, 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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
