Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British 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 would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground 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 impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
