Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU 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 part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
