Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU 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 a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
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 prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
