Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, 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 ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues 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, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space 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 for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
