Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, 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 so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
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 young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on 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 Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, 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, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
