Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool 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 scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement 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
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations have little interest 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 some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words 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 himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
