Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool 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 left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, 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 Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
