Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 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 was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- 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 have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
