Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn 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 EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage 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 seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
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 the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America 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 his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
