Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, 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 the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves 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
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
