Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out 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 survey data suggests 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 be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining 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 joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and 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 the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
