Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
