Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed 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 deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric 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 seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known 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 as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
