Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to 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 sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join 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 to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
