Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen 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. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, 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, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, 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 Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. 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.
