Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. 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 deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe 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, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving 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 a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways 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.
