Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted 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 was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
