Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall stood for 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: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth program for young people by which young people can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining 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 customs union membership.
While the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- 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 offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a suggestion that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement 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 for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career 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 makes them his – or her – own.
