Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 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 key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade 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, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages 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 an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start 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
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
