Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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 his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
