Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited 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 Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an 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 re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to 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 fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes America an undependable ally, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured 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, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
