Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
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. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure 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.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
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 for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, 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 remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
