Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite 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 EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric 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 how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, 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, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. 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 are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
