Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
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. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
