Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled Labour leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Bolder Ideas
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 allowing 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, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of deciding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers 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 and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office 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 regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps 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 for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
