Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out 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, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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 micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and 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 to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries 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 following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms 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 viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
