Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing 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 over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” 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 the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, 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 regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject 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 impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
