Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted 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 speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, 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 underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for 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 consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up 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 how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember 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 explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
