Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses 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 in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. 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 a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, 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 minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” 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 currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves 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 prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
