Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary 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 in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy 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 Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, 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 cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out 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 prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
