Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, 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 wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage 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 his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments 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 fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
