Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not precisely soaring oratory, the words met with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, 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 in 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” commitments that forbade 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 died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the “self-evident” benefits of joining an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water on the idea cautioning that a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price 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 proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document & Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion 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 unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers letting it be known they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out 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 wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
