Seven years ago, it took just eight words to electrify a Labour conference and to show Labour was becoming disillusioned with Jeremy Corbyn. Although not exactly stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall rose in spontaneous acclamation.
As the commotion died down, the then-Brexit spokesman, stood at the podium, visibly startled. He was unaccustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. His statement was simply: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was inevitably viewed as issuing a challenge to the party leader, who was trying to prioritise Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this seemingly cautious shadow Brexit secretary was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Debates
In the years since, much has happened, not least to Starmer himself. One of his first acts upon assuming leadership from Corbyn in 2020 was declaring the EU question had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that ruled out rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Similar to Corbyn, the PM's approach has been to pursue Brexit-y voters in key seats, even if polling evidence indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to face the pressures of being a party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis of British politics, the cap which was firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up the rhetoric about the devastation that leaving the EU has inflicted on Britain's economic standing. It’s a useful stick to criticize the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions his flagship policy was once his singular purpose and remains his only real achievement.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has resulted in an economy that is between 6% and 8% smaller compared to EU membership, towers over the minor adjustments so far offered by the government. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Cabinet Divergence and Bolder Ideas
The chancellor is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to an expansive version of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme by which young people can travel between Britain and Europe for work or study.
David Lammy muses openly about the clear advantages 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.
Although the Europe minister, the minister in charge of EU policy, who is now attending every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines are still in place, there are ways to work around them. A proposal involves announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
Starmer's Deep-Seated Doubts
Yet, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning a return to an EU customs arrangement could undermine the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
It is understood that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- First, he believes a customs pact has been made significantly more difficult as ministers are actively diverging from EU regulations in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Second, the prohibitive cost demanded from Britain for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the subsequent collapse in talks has led British officials that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK than in proving that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by Moscow, is seen by key advisors in Number 10 as a reason for Britain to maintain distance from Europe.
A Bizarre Document and Geopolitical Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe faces “civilizational erasure” because of Muslim migration. It includes a single mention to Britain, placed beside a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of deciding that this makes America an undependable ally, ministers reportedly fear that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Leadership Speculation & The Ghost from the Past
This situation brings us back to 2018. Starmer has always said his speech was not an attempt to become leader but merely an attempt to keep open the possibility of remain being on the ballot paper. Indeed, in those days, Starmer still favoured a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
Observers within Downing Street note that Wes Streeting, widely considered would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition regarding the EU.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union because it would only “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Clear Risk & A Prudent Memory
The danger is obvious. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he allows rivals to claim the territory where most of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be prudent of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on Europe that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals makes them his – or her – own.
