Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for 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 commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in 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 the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
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 preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group 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 to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
