Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning 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 the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain 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 with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, found on a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
