Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” 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 pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in 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 the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains 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 renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
