Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period 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 Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises 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, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up 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 the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU 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 powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, 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.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism 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 actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open 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 Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase 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 himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
