Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, 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 have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
