Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 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 working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up 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 seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly 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, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water 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.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, 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 effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.