Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into 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 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 key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
