Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly 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, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises 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 indicates a significant number 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 party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut 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 the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions 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 an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply 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 now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. 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 are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
