Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed 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 deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing 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.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
