Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. 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, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves 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.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations 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, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
