Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions 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 a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
