Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. With that single address, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution of Stance and Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, especially for Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he consistently stressed manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data suggests many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if Europe is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, last week supported a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to 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.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he regards as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from EU regulations across a range of policy areas, including the environment.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure in talks has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to maintain distance from the EU.
An Alarming Strategy & Geopolitical Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, found on a proposal that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a clutch of senior ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a contest for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Obvious Risk & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise for Starmer to recall the impact that a short phrase had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
