Back in 2018, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, 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 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
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 EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric 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 his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
