Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing 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 over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious 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 Evolution of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, 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 firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, 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 ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
