Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering 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 having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase 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 personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
