Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed 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 darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade 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, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
