Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met 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 was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations 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 Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
