Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised 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 pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat 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, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
