Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
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". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – 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
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. 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, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified 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 seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, 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 and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although 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 to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water 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 government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
