Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s 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.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit 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 remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, 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 thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move 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, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
