Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
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: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although 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 involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, he still supported 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, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
