Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from his agreed text 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 working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language 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 his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion 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 damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
