Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years 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 the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led 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, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner 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 Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
