Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
