Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass 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 for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues 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, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further 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. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
