Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that deeply polarized period in 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. A proposal would be to declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM ought to consider; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
