Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite the party's annual gathering and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – 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 Shift in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments 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, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is one of those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government 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 Echo from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
