Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
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 with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about 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, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” 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 for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
