Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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 inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. 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 remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
