Back in 2018, 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 phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished 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 negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, 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. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried 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 of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
