Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed 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 his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation 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 keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office 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.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, 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 ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
