Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time 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 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 – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
