Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the words were greeted with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was declaring the EU question was resolved by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves declaring the commencement of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. 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 growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear 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 Echo from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
