Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, 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 signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps 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 for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
