Seven years ago, it took just eight words to energize a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not exactly soaring oratory, the phrase met with rapturous applause as most of the hall rose in an impromptu ovation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. 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". Context, however, is key.
During that deeply polarized period in 2018, straying from his agreed text like this was always going to be seen as issuing a challenge to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize leave supporters in key constituencies over the pro-European instincts within Labour. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – if only for a while – into a risk-taker who championed the party's base against a leader he would later replace.
The Shift in Position & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts after taking over in 2020 was to declare the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade 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 target constituencies, even if polling evidence suggests a significant number have passed away or shifted opinion.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
Yet, the tables have turned and the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a Labour leader. And, if EU relations is no longer the boiling pot in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut since Brexit is starting to loosen once more.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat Nigel Farage, who seldom discusses 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 an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset agreed with Brussels last summer offers economic benefits quantified in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is one of those attempting to bypass entrenched Home Office resistance to a broader scheme designed to boost growth program for young people allowing youths can move between Britain and Europe to study or work.
David Lammy has pondered publicly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, such as the head of the powerful finance committee, last week supported an opposition proposal on joining one.
While the Europe minister, who oversees EU policy, who is now attending all cabinet sessions, insists the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there are ways to work around them. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now on a much bolder deal, for inclusion in the next manifesto, with implementation only if securing a fresh mandate.
The Prime Minister's Fundamental Scepticism
Yet, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that rejoining an EU customs arrangement could undermine the trade pacts with the US, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that Starmer's doubts run even deeper, and is rooted in several key concerns.
- First, he thinks any customs union agreement has been made much harder as ministers are actively diverging from European rules in numerous sectors, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the prohibitive cost set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has led UK negotiators that European nations are less interested in offering favorable terms with Britain than in demonstrating that Brexit does not work.
- Thirdly, America's latest security doctrine, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Number 10 as a reason for the UK to keep its distance from the EU.
An Alarming Document & Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying American strategy paper asserts Europe is threatened by cultural extinction due to Muslim migration. It includes only one reference to Britain, found on a suggestion that Donald Trump’s administration will intervene in our politics to foster the rise of nationalist movements.
But, far from deciding that this renders America an unreliable partner, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration would destabilise geopolitics further by risking fragile US military support for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost of 2018
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said that address was not an attempt to become leader but simply an attempt to preserve the “option” of staying in the EU being on the ballot paper. In fact, back then, Starmer still favoured a “bespoke customs union deal” of the kind he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is among a clutch of senior ministers letting it be known they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to Angela Rayner, another probable runner in a future race to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance regarding a customs pact because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Danger & A Wise Reminder
The danger is obvious. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he allows rivals to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters are to be found.
It would be prudent of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had on his career seven years ago. There are options for a major proposal on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should prise them open personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
