Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way 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. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions 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 left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind 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 part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
