Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme 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 about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start 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.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
