Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, 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 the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
