Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, 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.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now 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 which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group 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, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
