Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still 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 than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition 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.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters 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 big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
