Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, 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 speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining 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 polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal 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 new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
