Seven years ago, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
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 had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if 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 face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation 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 his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
