Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out 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 issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over 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” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data 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 be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues 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 following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one 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 stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
