Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept 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. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves 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 move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
