Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, 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 previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding 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, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
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 and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
