Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
