Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall 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 producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, 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 & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining 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, 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 Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements 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.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement 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 part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
