Back in 2018, a mere a short phrase to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as delegates stood for spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "We are not excluding remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from his agreed text in this way was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the Europhile sentiments within Labour. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Closed Issues
In the years since, much has happened, especially for Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, even if survey data indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. While EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric regarding the damage that leaving the EU has inflicted on 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 his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
Nevertheless, the scale of the damage, which by some estimates 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 ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling program for young people allowing youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, while a dozen Labour MPs, such as the head of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for an opposition proposal on joining one.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, to be featured in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Scepticism
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down on the idea by warning a return to a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his premiership.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he believes a customs pact is now much harder because his ministers actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Lastly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by Moscow, is seen by some influential figures in Downing Street as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Strategy & Strategic Calculations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes America an unreliable partner, ministers reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe could upset the global balance by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter and The Echo of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not a pitch to become leader but merely an effort to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they want to go further regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her position on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger and A Prudent Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out 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 prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had on his career in 2018. There are options for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
