Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. 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 his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters 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 most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving 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.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words 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, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
