Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, 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 focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues 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 new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration 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 brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain 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.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
