Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, 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 a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. 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 only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, 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 following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
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 the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
