Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn 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” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about 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, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves 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 Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials 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 the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
