Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited 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 would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
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 his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing 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 joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal 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, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words 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 personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
