Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, 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, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way 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 over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, despite survey data suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which 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 an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, 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 the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
