Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words 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 wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. 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 the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move 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 unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions 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 so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits 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 a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
