Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
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 EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, 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 measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly 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 voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are 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 ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & 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 keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
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 EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
