Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head 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 every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
