Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised 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, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves 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 just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
