New minister for Europe, Hamish Falconer, has hinted that Labour’s next election manifesto could significantly shift towards re-engaging with the European Union, reports BritPanorama.
Falconer, a new MP, remains in line with the current party policy while signaling a departure from the more cautious approach of his predecessor, Nick Thomas-Symonds. Instead of dismissing any talk of rejoining the EU, Falconer has introduced a more ambitious dialogue about potential changes to the UK’s relationship with Europe.
What did Falconer say?
During an interview with Sophie Ridge on Sky News, Falconer stated, “What we do in our next manifesto will be a question for the Labour Party.” While this might appear to be a straightforward comment, the implication of “refusing to rule it out” indicates a bold direction that contrasts with the more circumspect tone of Keir Starmer’s leadership.
He further elaborated on the evolving context since Brexit, asserting, “The world has changed since 2016. We need to make sure that our relationship with Europe changes too. Europe and the UK both face real challenges.” This marks a significant step in articulating a pro-European stance within the party.
What is Burnham saying?
In the context of recent political developments, Andy Burnham, the newly appointed leader, has not issued any major new statements since assuming office. However, while commentating on the Makerfield by-election, he indicated support for rejoining the EU, albeit with a cautious tone. He later clarified, “My view is that Brexit has been damaging, but I also believe the last thing we should do right now is rerun those arguments,” showcasing some internal contradiction.
On what terms might Britain rejoin the EU?
The potential frameworks for re-engagement are numerous, although the favourable arrangements that existed prior to Brexit are unlikely to be replicated. Options include rejoining the EU single market or customs union, rather than seeking full membership. Another possibility is extending the current de facto partial membership of the Single Market across additional sectors via “dynamic alignment,” although this complexity is unwelcome in Brussels, with Switzerland being the only country to attempt such a structure.
Comments from former EU Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier suggest that if Britain were to rejoin, it could potentially secure opt-outs from the euro and Schengen area rules, though this would involve negotiations over budget contributions, shared sovereignty, fisheries, and industrial protections. Central to any agreement would be the acceptance of freedom of movement, a contentious issue during the Brexit vote.
Are there any other downsides?
One potential downside to free movement is that it operates reciprocally, resulting in increased immigration pressures. Furthermore, any new trade agreements with countries like India, Australia, Japan, and the US could be jeopardised if Britain aligns more closely with EU regulations. This alignment might necessitate stricter regulations for the City and artificial intelligence sectors, potentially diminishing competitiveness.
Do we have to have another referendum?
No, and Falconer’s reference to the 2028-29 Labour manifesto might imply that a general election mandate could suffice to initiate the rejoining process. Constitutionally, a public vote is not required; Britain initially joined the European Communities in 1972 based on the electoral manifesto of that year’s Conservative government, which did not explicitly commit to EU membership.
The experience from the post-Brexit referendum indicates that a general election, akin to the “Get Brexit Done” election of December 2019, could provide the necessary authority for legislative action. A manifesto commitment to rejoin, dependent on the best terms achievable, could be perceived as a weak mandate unless supported by a coalition of pro-EU parties, amplifying the overall vote in favor.
The overarching question remains whether the UK electorate is prepared to navigate further challenges associated with EU relations, regardless of the proposed method.
How long would it take?
Rejoining could take several years, given that many laws still overlap under the current Brexit treaty, making the process complex and arduous.
Will they actually want us back?
This is a seldom-asked question in British discourse. Despite warm rhetoric from European leaders, the prospect of a member state cycling in and out every couple of decades poses a substantial challenge for the EU. Only a significant and clear shift in public sentiment towards re-entry, ideally reflected by a strong majority, would create a sustainable basis for negotiations.
Should support for rejoining approach 70 percent, discussions might be viable; on the other hand, yet another narrow 52/48 decision would present considerable risks.
