Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words met with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his speeches 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, straying from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for the party's base against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift of Stance and Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates a significant number have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on the EU
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations may not be the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle again.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was his primary goal and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people by which youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the clear advantages of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently supported a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after Labour won a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the trade pacts with America, which he views as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain and are more focused on proving that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is seen by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to keep its distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It contains only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Leadership Speculation and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to the conference of 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but simply an effort to preserve the “option” of remain 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 have noticed that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate for the leadership, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Memory
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact that a short phrase had for him in 2018. Potential pathways for a big offer on EU relations which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
