Back in 2018, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. Although not exactly soaring oratory, the words met with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In 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 key constituencies over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed the party's base against the leadership he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Issues
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data suggests a significant number have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome long-standing 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 for work or study.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the clear advantages of joining a customs union with the EU, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines 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 securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult because his ministers actively diverging from European rules across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners have little interest in offering favorable terms to the UK than in proving that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they want to go further on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent for Starmer to recall the impact just a few words had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them himself, before someone else adopt them as their own.
