Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for spontaneous acclamation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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 of 2018, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a risk-taker who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to 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 ruled out re-entry into the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if polling evidence indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations may not be the boiling pot in UK politics, a lid that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is among 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 Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of joining a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently pouring cold water on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that former EU partners have little interest in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe faces cultural extinction because of Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
All of which returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but merely an effort to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, back then, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, insist she won’t discuss her position on a customs union as it would merely “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of Labour MPs, members and voters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
