Seven years ago, a mere eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. 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 of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement 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 Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers 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 of negotiations has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind 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 stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
