Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
