Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue 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 been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, 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.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
