Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into 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 polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage 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 his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost 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 effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
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 occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
