Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
