Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, 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.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While 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.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks 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, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering 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. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
