Seven years ago, a mere eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
