Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies 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 would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled 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 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages 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 customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, 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 group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
