Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet 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 underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national 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 relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, 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 note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
