Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy 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 an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts 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 is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” 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 note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
