Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over 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 fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea 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 fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
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 preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
