Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words 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 addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an 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 re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
