Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs 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 and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
