Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates 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. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. 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 Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street 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 for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
