Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move 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 promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, 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, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, 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 Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain 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 stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
