Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to 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 is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
