I worry that Kier Starmer may be making a big mistake on Brexit. He has written an article in The Daily Express ruling out any return to the EU or the single market or the customs union. He has certainly split the pro-EU side, with some believing he’s missed an opportunity while others think he’s secretly planning to rejoin while openly declaring the opposite. Neither is particularly good in my opinion.
Here's the piece:
Starmer seems to understand that the way to make Brexit stick is to raise growth - the question is whether his policies would do so https://t.co/KOHgCSnpoP
— John Springford (@JohnSpringford) May 31, 2023
There is evidence that Labour’s support would increase if he unequivocally supported a return to the single market or even rejoining (in my opinion the first inevitably means the second). He is, according to some pollsters, leaking support towards the LibDems and The Greens from some anti-Brexit campaigners who think he's selling out.
It is perhaps an indication of the fear inside Labour of the right-wing press launching a concerted attack if he threatens the insanity of Brexit in any way at all. I’m sure that would happen but I’m not sure it would necessarily damage Starmer and may even help him. I acknowledge it’s a gamble and he’s right to be cautious but a bit of bold thinking wouldn't go amiss.
This is from his article:
"Britain’s future is outside the EU. Not in the single market, not in the customs union, not with a return to freedom of movement. Those arguments are in the past, where they belong.
"But they also expect politicians to be honest."
The Express article doesn’t leave much wriggle room. He’s either going to stick to what he’s said or repudiate it totally in which case the second sentence above is going to look terrible.
Meanwhile, Ian Dunt, has a piece in The i News setting out what he is quite certain is an interpretation of Labour’s position and he claims:
“In truth, Labour’s Brexit position is far more nuanced, and much more radical, than it first appears. It has been carefully couched in the language of Brexit defence, but the proposals themselves promise a return to a much closer relationship with the Continent. It is the start of a journey back to Europe.”
Dunt, who writes extensively on Brexit, claims the Labour position “would include 'mutual recognition of conformity assessments across specified sectors' – where one partner accepts the tests for goods conducted by the other without them needing to be checked twice.”
The EU has already specifically refused mutual recognition (MRA) because the UK is geographically so close. This, say the EU, means there’s no need for mutual recognition of conformity assessment, UK manufacturers can pop across the Channel to get products CE approved. I can’t see how Starmer is going to get Brussels to change its mind. Canada has an MRA but is 3,000 miles away so that makes perfect sense.
A veterinary agreement (VA) may be possible (as with Switzerland) but would mean dynamic alignment with EU rules over which the UK has no influence. It may also cause issues with the NZ and Australian trade deals and with CPTPP. Frost once said following EU SPS rules would make negotiating FTAs with other countries more difficult. I confess I don't know.
A VA would reduce the number of border checks but wouldn’t eliminate them altogether, and it wouldn’t have any effect on other goods at all.
However, Dunt points to a 5-point plan outlined by Starmer last year which claimed:
"As well as building trust, Labour would eliminate most border checks created by the Tory Brexit deal. With a new veterinary agreement for agri-products between the UK and EU. And we will work with business to put in place a better scheme to allow low-risk goods to enter Northern Ireland without unnecessary checks.
"The second step we would take is to tear down unnecessary barriers. Labour would extend that new veterinary agreement to cover all the UK benefiting exporters at a stroke."
So Starmer says he will "eliminate most" border checks created by the TCA for all "UK benefitting exporters at a stroke."
A lot of people think this is just more cakeism. Labour is obviously more relaxed about dynamically aligning with EU SPS (and possibly other) rules because they don't have the visceral ideological hatred of Brussels that the Tories do.
Dunt concludes, "If you put aside the tedious and unconvincing hardline rhetoric, a clear picture emerges. Brexit is collapsing. And Britain is, slowly but surely, drifting back to Europe."
I assume Labour is constantly polling and following the evidence they are getting back. For sure, if he can get a much closer relationship with the EU, if trade begins to bounce back and if he does get the economic growth we badly need, it would make a powerful case for rejoining. And if Labour can connect an improving standard of living with this closer EU relationship, the case for rejoining could be overwhelming.
There are a lot of 'ifs' in all of that but we shouldn't forget that, to make our next EU membership more permanent we need the Tory party to accept it and they will find it much harder to argue against it if Joe Public is seeing some real-world benefits like higher wages, lower inflation, more jobs and investment, easier travel, reduced trade costs and so on.
It could force an early split in Conservative ranks and a return to One Nation Toryism with a smaller Reform Party wandering around the anti-EU wilderness. Dunt thinks Starmer has at least two terms in mind with him switching policy towards rejoining in the second term running towards 2030.
He may be right but it's still a worry that Starmer can't be straight about his plans. How are we supposed to know who to vote for next year?
