Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled 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, despite polling evidence suggests many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth 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 clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials 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.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject 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 of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
