Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths 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 an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
