Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to energize a Labour conference demonstrating the party was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the words were greeted with wild cheering as delegates rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses having such an effect. All he had said was: "We are not excluding remain as an option". But context is everything.
During that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman underwent a transformation – 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 Evolution of Stance and Settled Debates
Since then, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the 2019 national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Similar to Corbyn, his strategy has been to pursue pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While Europe is no longer the central crisis of British politics, a lid that has been kept tightly sealed for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified the rhetoric regarding the damage caused by Brexit has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his only real achievement.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates has resulted in an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the micro-mitigation so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU in 2024 offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe for work or study.
The deputy prime minister muses openly about 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, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, to be featured in the following election platform, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he regards as signature achievements of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain for entry into a European defense initiative and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led British officials that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference of the UK, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders America an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter & The Echo of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not a pitch to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is among a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open himself, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
