Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying 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 working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates 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 thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
