Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to electrify the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out 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 laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that forbade re-entry into 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 indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the trade pacts with the US, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement is now much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning document asserts Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, 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 on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger and A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where the overwhelming majority of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
