Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over 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 and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
