Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number 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. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
