Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During 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 was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel 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, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, 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 Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
