Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit 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. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership 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 now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
