Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number 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 party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, 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 measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
