Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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 remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text 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 pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
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 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 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 agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again 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 the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters 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 EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
