Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 in 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
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, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about 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, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which 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 being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect 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 prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
