Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
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. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy 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 powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
