Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, 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 wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out 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 sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
