Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal 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 compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
