Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one 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 part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
