Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, 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: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, 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, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
