Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, 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 Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, 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 Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
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 micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, 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 makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers 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 from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
