Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, 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.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, 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, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric 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 how leaving the EU was his primary goal 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, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, 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 effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
