🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates

In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.

A Lid That Rattles on the EU

Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.

And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.

Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals

The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.

David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts

Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
2. Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK 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 and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
3. Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.

But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.

Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space 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 for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.