Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "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 laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, 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 pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
