Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up 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 how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition 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 about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
