Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, 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, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.