Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. 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 the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
