Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. 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 focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open 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 Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. 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 of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
