Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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 the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
