Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number 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 be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, 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 European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
