Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Scepticism
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
However, instead of concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance 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 the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
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 Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
