Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & 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 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, 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 agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly 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, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways 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 new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost 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 attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals 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 on his career seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
