Social Europe

politics, economy and employment & labour

  • Themes
    • Global cities
    • Strategic autonomy
    • War in Ukraine
    • European digital sphere
    • Recovery and resilience
  • Publications
    • Books
    • Dossiers
    • Occasional Papers
    • Research Essays
    • Brexit Paper Series
  • Podcast
  • Videos
  • Newsletter
  • Membership

How Should Labour Handle The Brexit Referendum?

Denis MacShane 19th June 2015

Denis MacShane

Denis MacShane

As the Commons begins to discuss the Brexit plebiscite how should Labour handle the referendum?  By far the most important intervention was not a speech in the EU referendum bill debate but the warning from a troika of pro-European union leaders – Frances O’Grady of the TUC, Dave Prentis of Unison and Sir Paul Kenny of the GMB – that Cameron cannot assume trade union support if he insists on using his “renegotiation” to weaken Social Europe rights.

Every major referendum on Europe so far this century has been lost because the voter base of the left has voted No to Europe even if the organisers of the anti-EU campaigns have been nationalist politicians mainly on the right. The left-behinds and losers of EU integration take their chance in a plebiscite to punish the leaders who urge them onwards to accept more Europe.

If the trade unions swing against Cameron on Europe this will be a far bigger boost for the Brexit camp than anything else. It will also increase the chances of Labour splitting.

Cameron has to be a unifier if he wants to avoid Brexit. As he struggles with his party and its deep Eurosceptic instincts it is also an opportunity for Labour to escape from its navel-gazing eternal post-mortem and again stand for Britain as a whole.

It was François Mitterrand who observed that ‘the trouble with referendums is voters never answer the question.’ He kept France in Europe by the skin of his teeth in 1992 when what he thought would be an easy Oui to the Maastricht Treaty became the narrowest of results. His successor, Jacques Chirac, breezily called a referendum in 2005, assuming that his own party, the French socialists and all men and women of bonne foi would confirm France’s status as a major EU player.

He forgot about the voters. They listened to socialist tribunes who broke with the official pro-EU party line and linked with the far right and what the French call souverainistes to punish the unpopular Chirac by voting Non to Europe. The left won but lost the presidential election in 2007 as voters were unimpressed by a divided socialist party.

The pattern of major EU referendums is that opinion polls start well but then something happens. The Yes camp are the establishment, the money men, the media, the state functionaries, global business but they are out of touch with the deeper resentment of a voting population that feels the EU exists for others, not for them.

David Cameron has taken a huge risk with his Brexit plebiscite. He is a Eurosceptic himself and made concession after concession to anti-EU forces including giving in to the main UKIP demand – an In-Out referendum .

Cameron can easily lose the referendum for Britain. The sight of him and maybe even Rupert Murdoch standing on their heads and swallowing two decades of anti-EU wordage is not appealing to voters. Instead the task falls to Labour with help from the Lib-Dems, alive in spirit if not in seats, to defeat the isolationists and keep Britain in Europe.

The exact nature of the campaign is not important. Harold Wilson and Margaret Thatcher did not appear on joint platforms in the 1975 but Labour put up John Smith, Shirley Williams, Roy Jenkins and others who argued with passion and persuasion that Britain should remain linked to the continent.

Labour can do no less today even if faced with a referendum called for opportunistic vote-grabbing reasons and now under the control of a cabinet stuffed full of anti-Europeans. Labour’s new leader and those who will form the next Labour cabinet need to shine in this campaign with commitment and conviction.

Labour has to avoid two traps. The first is the lure of left nationalist protectionism that marginalised Labour in the 1980s. There will always be a left critique of the EU but that should be a spur to its reform not a retreat to North Korean style rejection of open Europe.

The second is to play tactical games seeking to trip up Cameron. Yes, he is hypocritical and yes, there will be endless Schadenfreude as the MPs he told to hate the EU now turn on him. But Labour should let the Tories eat each other without seeking its own little opportunisms.

Of course some Labour MPs will say No. In 2005 just before the election I was standing behind the Speaker’s Chair with David Cameron waiting to go into the Chamber. The Tory MP, a fellow of All Souls, Robert Jackson, had just defected to Labour in disgust at the anti-Europeanism that infected his party.

I asked Cameron jokingly who would be the next defector? ‘Kate Hoey,’ he replied without a pause. The redoubtable Ulsterwoman has had trenchant views ever since her days as a National Union of Students leader and her opposition to Europe should be recognised and respected.

But Labour must stand for Britain and against the risk of a return to isolationism. Ever since the Conservatives veered off into anti-EU waters in the 1990s, Labour had stood for Britain in Europe. It should not change now. This is a moment which will define Britain for generations to come. Labour should be on the right side of the argument and show that a Tory change to being pro-EU is welcome and in the national interest. Labour can and must win this vote for Britain and for Europe and our partners everywhere in the world.

Denis MacShane

Denis MacShane was a Labour MP (1994-2012) and served as UK minister of Europe. He writes regularly on European politics and Brexit.

You are here: Home / Politics / How Should Labour Handle The Brexit Referendum?

Most Popular Posts

Russia,information war Russia is winning the information warAiste Merfeldaite
Nanterre,police Nanterre and the suburbs: the lid comes offJoseph Downing
Russia,nuclear Russia’s dangerous nuclear consensusAna Palacio
Belarus,Lithuania A tale of two countries: Belarus and LithuaniaThorvaldur Gylfason and Eduard Hochreiter
retirement,Finland,ageing,pension,reform Late retirement: possible for many, not for allKati Kuitto

Most Recent Posts

Nagorno-Karabakh,European Union,EU,Azerbaijan,Armenia Azerbaijan exploits vacuum on Nagorno-KarabakhGeorge Meneshian
Abuse,work,workplace,violence Abuse at work: who bears the brunt?Agnès Parent-Thirion and Viginta Ivaskaite-Tamosiune
Ukraine,fatigue Ukraine’s cause: momentum is diminishingStefan Wolff and Tetyana Malyarenko
Vienna,social housing Vienna social-housing model: celebrated but misusedGabu Heindl
social democracy,nation-state Social democracy versus the nativist rightJan Zielonka

Other Social Europe Publications

strategic autonomy Strategic autonomy
Bildschirmfoto 2023 05 08 um 21.36.25 scaled 1 RE No. 13: Failed Market Approaches to Long-Term Care
front cover Towards a social-democratic century?
Cover e1655225066994 National recovery and resilience plans
Untitled design The transatlantic relationship

Foundation for European Progressive Studies Advertisement

The summer issue of the Progressive Post magazine by FEPS is out!

The Special Coverage of this new edition is dedicated to the importance of biodiversity, not only as a good in itself but also for the very existence of humankind. We need a paradigm change in the mostly utilitarian relation humans have with nature.

In this issue, we also look at the hazards of unregulated artificial intelligence, explore the shortcomings of the EU's approach to migration and asylum management, and analyse the social downside of the EU's current ethnically-focused Roma policy.


DOWNLOAD HERE

Hans Böckler Stiftung Advertisement

WSI European Collective Bargaining Report 2022 / 2023

With real wages falling by 4 per cent in 2022, workers in the European Union suffered an unprecedented loss in purchasing power. The reason for this was the rapid increase in consumer prices, behind which nominal wage growth fell significantly. Meanwhile, inflation is no longer driven by energy import prices, but by domestic factors. The increased profit margins of companies are a major reason for persistent inflation. In this difficult environment, trade unions are faced with the challenge of securing real wages—and companies have the responsibility of making their contribution to returning to the path of political stability by reducing excess profits.


DOWNLOAD HERE

ETUI advertisement

The future of remote work

The 12 chapters collected in this volume provide a multidisciplinary perspective on the impact and the future trajectories of remote work, from the nexus between the location from where work is performed and how it is performed to how remote locations may affect the way work is managed and organised, as well as the applicability of existing legislation. Additional questions concern remote work’s environmental and social impact and the rapidly changing nature of the relationship between work and life.


AVAILABLE HERE

Eurofound advertisement

Eurofound Talks: does Europe have the skills it needs for a changing economy?

In this episode of the Eurofound Talks podcast, Mary McCaughey speaks with Eurofound’s research manager, Tina Weber, its senior research manager, Gijs van Houten, and Giovanni Russo, senior expert at CEDEFOP (The European Centre for the Development of Vocational Training), about Europe’s skills challenges and what can be done to help workers and businesses adapt to future skills demands.

Listen where you get your podcasts, or for free, by clicking on the link below


LISTEN HERE

About Social Europe

Our Mission

Article Submission

Membership

Advertisements

Legal Disclosure

Privacy Policy

Copyright

Social Europe ISSN 2628-7641

Social Europe Archives

Search Social Europe

Themes Archive

Politics Archive

Economy Archive

Society Archive

Ecology Archive

Follow us

RSS Feed

Follow us on Facebook

Follow us on Twitter

Follow us on LinkedIn

Follow us on YouTube