Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about 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, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
