Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
