Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall 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 speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited 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 Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
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 EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.