Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK 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 viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. 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 prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
