Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly 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 speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them 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 party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to 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 is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
