🔗 Share this article

Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.

As the commotion died down, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.

During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.

The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates

Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.

Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.

Pressure Building on the EU

However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.

Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.

Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.

Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas

Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people 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, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.

While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.

The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism

Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.

Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.

1. Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
2. Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
3. Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.

An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations

This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.

However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.

Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018

This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.

Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.

Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.

The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Memory

The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves 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 prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.