Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
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, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start 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 Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported 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 in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender 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 Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
