Back in 2018, it took just a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause 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 wasn't really accustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates 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 be an embattled party leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
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 micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces “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 growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe 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
All of which returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest to replace Starmer, insist she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
