Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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 sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, 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 the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
