Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now 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
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, 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 maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect 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 makes them his – or her – own.
