Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
