Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was 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 with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water 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 go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms 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 Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
