Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text 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 Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which 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, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements 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 has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered 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 the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
