Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text 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. In just one speech, 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 would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU 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 Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
