Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely soaring oratory, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, departing from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance and Closed Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, a lid which was firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
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 with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted re-set deal negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can move between the UK and the EU to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines are still in place, there exist avenues these could be bypassed. One idea 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
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders America an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, back then, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate for the leadership, is among a clutch of cabinet ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be wise for Starmer to remember the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, before someone else adopt them as their own.
