Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, 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” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, 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 are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
