Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of 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 announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner 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 risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
