Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains 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 Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
