Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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 of 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 over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out 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 survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs 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 quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating 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 maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
