Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved 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.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees 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 would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note 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 desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
