Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period 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 Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. 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 of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished 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 fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, 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 Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
