Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
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, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
