🔗 Share this article

Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.

When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.

During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.

The Shift in Position & Closed Issues

Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.

Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.

Pressure Building on Europe

Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.

The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.

Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas

The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.

David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.

While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.

It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.

1. First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.

A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations

This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.

However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018

All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.

Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.

The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder

The risk is clear. 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 of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.