Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America 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.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
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 “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
