Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves 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 for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
