Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for 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.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if 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 party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to 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 only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in 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 the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel 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 powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known 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 stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
