Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
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 tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in 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 every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America 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 of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, 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, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
