Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, 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 would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation 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 Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement 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, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
