Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, 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". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates 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 thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, 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.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement 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 be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
