Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
