An Warning to Keir Starmer drawn from His Own Past: Without Boldness on Brexit & Europe, His Labour Rivals Will Be.
Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility 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 the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
