Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister 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, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed 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 American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers 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 Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
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 the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
