Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
