Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, 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 ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing 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 an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
