Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested 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, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one 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 clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
