Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
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 in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool 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 micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, 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, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet 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 for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
