Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, 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.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
