Seven years ago, a mere eight words to energize the party's annual gathering demonstrating Labour was becoming disillusioned with its then leader. While not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, visibly startled. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 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 over the Europhile sentiments within Labour. 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 most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Shift in Position and Closed Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was to declare the EU question was resolved by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he consistently stressed unbreakable pledge promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in key seats, even if survey data indicates a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on the EU
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled Labour leader. While EU relations may not be the boiling pot of British politics, the cap which was tightly sealed since Brexit is beginning to rattle once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have intensified their language about the devastation that leaving the EU has caused to Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the scale of the damage, reportedly has left Britain with a national economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, dwarfs the minor adjustments so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is among those trying to overcome entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling program for young people by which youths can travel between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages of being in a customs union with the EU, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on joining one.
While the Europe minister, the minister in charge of UK-EU relations, now present at all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries are still in place, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to declaring the commencement of negotiations now 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
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again 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.
Reportedly that Starmer's doubts go still deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price demanded from Britain to join the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led UK negotiators that European nations have little interest in cutting special deals with Britain than in demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by Moscow, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe faces cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Echo from the Past
This situation returns us to the conference of 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to preserve the possibility of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand in any leadership election, is among a group of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, insist she won’t discuss her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out more meaningful steps towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to remember the impact just a few words had on his career in 2018. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
