Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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 laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, 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 micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, 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 following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” 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 the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
