Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool with which to beat Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which young people can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced British officials that European nations have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning document claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement 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 for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Memory
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps 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 effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
