Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises 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, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to 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 scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy 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 supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves 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 of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
