Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains 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 makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. 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 for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
