Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
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 had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, 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 so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK 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 viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost 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 merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
