Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested 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 some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
