Keir Starmer recently disregarded rejoining the EU; now, he must reconsider. | William Keegan

First impressions count. A new prime minister must tread with care when initiating policy initiatives that will have long-term ramifications. As soon as Clement Attlee became Labour prime minister in 1945 after serving as wartime deputy premier under Churchill, his first task as prime minister would be introducing austerity measures as Britain rebuilt from wartime economic damage. Austerity policies became part of daily life as Britain rebuilt itself economically from wartime destruction. Shortages required rationing until an economy could fully resume operations during peacetime. From 2010 on, austerity policies adopted by Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition governments could hardly have been more obvious. Spearheaded by then chancellor George Osborne and set in motion after 2010, austerity consisted of false economic assumptions combined with rightwing solutions like tax cuts to drive back past rates of growth of public services instead. False assumptions were advanced as justifications for Labour’s putative overspending; rather, banking crises had caused it. Unfair comparisons were drawn with Greece’s economy which had far deeper problems. These were presented as justification for austerity measures. Last week’s election result demonstrated in part the electorate’s reaction to austerity’s cumulative effects. But he did not spend enough time discussing what should be done about Brexit’s horrendous effects, which have compounded on an economy already struggling under austerity measures. I return to my opening line about early action taken (or not taken) by future prime ministers having long-lasting implications. An unforgettable example of inaction having serious repercussions occurred in 1964 when newly elected Harold Wilson went against advice of advisers by resisting calls for devaluing an overvalued British currency. Misaligning of currency was impeding export drive; sterling crises forced recourse to deflationary measures which did nothing for government’s plans for growth. Wilson eventually relented and devalued, which forced the markets to do it on him in 1967. At first reluctant, devaluation was forced upon Wilson by market pressures in 1967.analyse and offer opinions about this week’s news and culture by top Observer writers; Privacy Warning: Our newsletters may include information regarding charities, online ads or content funded by third-parties; please be aware this might happen! For more details please see our Privacy Policy. For security of our website and Google reCaptcha protection purposes, their respective Privacy Policies and Terms of Service apply; newsletter promotion. If there ever was an unnecessary obstacle to trade it is undoubtedly Britain’s exclusion from European Union; yet this argument still holds water when applied against Starmer’s statement that this excludes us. His equivalent of devaluation error would have been making a decision which may hinder growth plans, similar to Wilson in 1964; in this instance however it wasn’t his initial major economic decision as president. No: Starmer took office last week from what could be termed an advantageous poll position that almost ensured his entry to government shortly afterwards. Although Starmer and Rachel Reeves had repeatedly downplayed any prospects of rejoining either single market and customs union membership, many pro-Europeans held out hope that his attitude merely represented fear over upsetting red wall voters who deserted Labour during its previous electoral challenge. Since 2016, Starmer’s position on European Single Market reentry has been under scrutiny from rightwing newspapers, particularly during his prime ministership campaign. Yet last week – under pressure from certain sectors of his party’s press – Prime Minister May firmly rejected joining any EU single market or customs union or returning to freedom of movement during his lifetime: “I have made clear my unwillingness to rejoin either. “Labour’s plans to improve trading relations with Europe will only have “minimal” impact in mitigating the huge and mounting costs associated with Brexit,” according to thinktank UK in a Changing Europe. And then when the same thinktank uncovers data showing that 78% – yes 78%! – of Labour voters support returning to the EU! Labour promises in its manifesto to remove barriers that prevent trade between nations. As far as trade is concerned, our exclusion from the European Union stands as one of the single greatest impediments to trade. Please understand this is meant as constructive criticism only and not meant as criticism itself. Starmer deserves enormous credit for making Labour party elections competitive again so quickly after decades of Conservative rule. After their reign of terror had run its course.But Starmer must work on EU matters soonest: not in his lifetime as was stated by Chancellor Helmut Kohl in 1988 when speaking about German unification’s likelihood and yet two years later Germany had been reunited again!