Back in 2018, it took just eight words to ignite a Labour conference demonstrating Labour was falling out of love with Jeremy Corbyn. While not precisely stirring rhetoric, the phrase were greeted with wild cheering as most of the hall stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, the then-Brexit spokesman, remained at the lectern, blinking in surprise. He was unaccustomed to his speeches having such an effect. All he had said was: "Nobody is ruling out remain as an option". Context, however, is key.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, straying from the prepared script in this way was inevitably viewed as laying down the gauntlet to Jeremy Corbyn, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in key constituencies above the pro-European instincts of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited shadow Brexit secretary underwent a transformation – if only for a while – into a political gambler who would stand up for most Labour MPs, members and voters against a leader he would later replace.
The Evolution of Stance & Settled Debates
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was declaring the Brexit issue had been settled by the previous year’s general election. During the most recent campaign, he repeatedly emphasised manifesto “red line” promises that forbade rejoining the European Union or its core structures.
Like his predecessor, his strategy has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in key seats, despite survey data indicates many of them have died or changed their minds.
A Lid That Rattles on Europe
However, it’s now the prime minister’s turn to be an embattled party leader. While EU relations is no longer the central crisis in UK politics, the cap that has been kept firmly shut for five years is starting to loosen once more.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor have ramped up their language about the devastation caused by Brexit has caused to Britain's economic standing. This serves as an effective tool to criticize the Reform UK leader, who seldom discusses his flagship policy was once his singular purpose 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 compared to EU membership, towers over the micro-mitigation so far offered by ministers. The PM's much-touted relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer offers economic benefits measured in low decimal points.
Internal Pressure & Ambitious Proposals
Rachel Reeves is among those attempting to bypass long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme of a growth-enabling youth mobility scheme allowing youths can travel between the UK and the EU to study or work.
The deputy prime minister muses openly regarding the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the Treasury select committee, recently voted for a Liberal Democrat motion on customs union membership.
Although Nick Thomas-Symonds, who oversees UK-EU relations, now present at every cabinet meeting, insists the red lines remain unchanged, there are ways these could be bypassed. One idea involves declaring the commencement of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the next manifesto, to be enacted only after securing a fresh mandate.
Starmer's Fundamental Doubts
However, Starmer has lately been pouring cold water again by warning rejoining an EU customs arrangement would “unravel” the commercial agreements with America, which he views as signature achievements of his government.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism go still deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he believes any customs union agreement has been made much harder because his ministers busily de-aligning from European rules across a range of sectors, including the environment.
- Second, the exorbitant price set for the UK for entry into the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure of negotiations has convinced British officials that former EU partners are less interested in offering favorable terms to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, praised by the Kremlin, is viewed by some influential figures in Downing Street as grounds for the UK to maintain distance from Europe.
An Alarming Document and Strategic Calculations
This bizarre and terrifying document asserts Europe is threatened by “civilizational erasure” due to Muslim migration. It contains a single mention to Britain, found on a suggestion that the US government may interfere in British politics to foster the growth of “patriotic” parties.
However, instead of concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by risking precarious American backing for Ukraine, Nato and much more besides.
Succession Chatter and The Ghost of 2018
All of which brings us back to 2018. The PM has consistently stated that address was not an attempt for the leadership but merely an effort to keep open the “option” of remain in a future vote. In fact, back then, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he currently seems to reject.
But it’s not been lost on the Prime Minister's office have noticed that the Health Secretary, who just about everyone assumes would be a candidate in any leadership election, is part of a clutch of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Staff for Angela Rayner, another likely contender in a contest to replace Starmer, maintain she won’t discuss her position on a customs union because it would only “fuel unnecessary gossip”.
The Clear Risk and A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. If Starmer rules out significant moves towards a close relationship, he cedes ground to occupy the space where most of the party's supporters reside.
It would be wise of him to recall the impact just a few words had for him seven years ago. There are options for a big offer on Europe which the PM should not “rule out”; he should explore them himself, before someone else makes them his – or her – own.
