Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over 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 forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an 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. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
