Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut 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 the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with 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 quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, 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 declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, 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.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, 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 impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
