Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates 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. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and 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 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 that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
