Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script 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 above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British 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 their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. 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.
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 compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start 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.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking 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 that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals 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 EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
