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 soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen 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 with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, 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 impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
