Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with 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 ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists 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 on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials 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.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase 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.
