Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters 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 a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” 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 three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
