Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. 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 deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, 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 stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
