When all you do is speak to a fringe that was never majority view because you imagine it might vote for you in future; when you don’t even want to try convince that fringe of something better; when you never take a stand for a principle even though you said you would .... Ta-da. https://twitter.com/nickeardleybbc/status/1348209600475095040

I’m not actually surprised by this at all—in fact, I think it was entirely predictable—but it’s grim nonetheless. I suppose Starmer wants to “close” this chapter. Thing is: it’s the one that will persist due to the realities of what no freedom of movement means. It won’t go away.

With that in mind, Starmer is doing exactly the wrong thing. Short-term it may gain him some traction in the fringe he so desperately wants to pander to, but, if nothing else, it’s strategically just poor because it pushes away a much larger portion of the electorate.

But it’s also another nail in the coffin of trust: a u-turn and a broken promise without any rationale. Like with those six tests for the deal. Politicians of both main parties just continue to mislead on what they stand for—that’s not good for anyone. https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/keir-starmer-says-would-bring-21401161

PS: I think it’s fair to say that Starmer is in a difficult position no matter what he says. But hence my point on principle as FoM will not go away as an issue. So it’s strategically illiterate to imply it will and to keep pandering to the same fringe the Tories also pander to.

Moreover, and my final comment: I can accept he wants to let the negative impacts of the deal reveal themselves etc. That will help shift some views. But FoM will remain a key issue and so that needs a progressive position. He can’t just start with that in 2023 or some such.