Back in 2018, a mere eight words to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, 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 darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – 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 in Position & Closed Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal agreed with Brussels in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which young people can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- 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 British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals with Britain and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort 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 now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race 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 & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
