Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing 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 over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified 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 the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
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 relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into 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, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
