Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 the prepared script 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. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU 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 between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase 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 personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
