Back in 2018, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words 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 was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot of British politics, a lid which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. A proposal would be to announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led British officials that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that the US government will intervene in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Danger & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
