Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies 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 would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy 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, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price 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 have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
