Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of joining 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 customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
