Seven years ago, it took just a short phrase to ignite a Labour conference and to show Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that deeply polarized period of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise leave supporters in working-class seats over the pro-European instincts of his party. With that single address, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who would stand up for the party's base against a leader he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position and Settled Debates
In the years since, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue was resolved by the previous year’s general election. 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, his strategy has focused on winning pro-Leave voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. And, if EU relations may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is beginning to rattle again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have intensified their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize Nigel Farage, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and is still his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, which by some estimates has left Britain with an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation thus far implemented by ministers. Starmer’s so-called re-set deal agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in fractions of a percent.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which youths can move between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about 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.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees EU policy, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves announce the start of talks immediately for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if Labour won a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been damping it all down again by warning rejoining a European customs area could undermine the trade pacts with America, which he regards as key accomplishments of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join a European defense initiative and the subsequent collapse in talks has convinced UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Number 10 as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Strategy and Geopolitical Considerations
This strange and concerning American strategy paper claims Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of immigration. It contains only one reference to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in our politics to foster the rise of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this makes the US an unreliable partner, the government reportedly fear that aligning closer with Europe would destabilise geopolitics further by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost from the Past
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain in a future vote. Indeed, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement of the kind he currently seems to reject.
Observers within the Prime Minister's office have noticed that Wes Streeting, who just about everyone assumes would stand for the leadership, is part of a group of senior ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a future race for the top job, insist she refuses to comment on her position regarding a customs pact as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject significant moves towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the effect just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
