Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted 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. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, 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 Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour 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 beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks 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.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, 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 Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
