Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing 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 Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact 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 himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
