Back in 2018, a mere eight words to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, 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 and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured 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 Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
