Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed 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 seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position 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 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs 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 Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
