Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests 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 party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses 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 an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments 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 and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested 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, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
