Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts 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 consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of 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 in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
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 senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
