Hilary Benn and Alan Johnson’s EU arguments work both ways

Jonathan Lindsell, 29 September 2015

Speaking at the Labour conference yesterday, shadow foreign secretary Hilary Benn argued that his party should campaign for continued EU membership regardless of the outcome of David Cameron’s renegotiation. He reasoned, probably correctly, that if Cameron achieved an exemption from EU employment law, Labour could opt back in when it regained power. He was supported by veteran MEP Richard Corbett, who urged Labour to consider the referendum as being about the whole EU, assuring delegates that once in power, Labour could undo Cameron’s ‘fiddly little changes’.  Alan Johnson, leader of the Labour In campaign, said as much – Labour is In, ‘no ifs, no buts, no maybes’.

This is a subtle point. It enables Benn to show he is listening to members from the left, who are worried about Cameron’s aims to undo EU work protection like the Working Time Directive, but to stay amenable with the party’s centre and right too. The more moderate members may be happy with Cameron’s final settlement if it genuinely increases opportunities for business to flourish, but does not unfairly hammer the worker. In this case, the party will be able to debate Cameron’s settlement and decide which EU laws to participate in later – assuming Britain is still in the EU whenever it regains power. Blairites cannot lament the approach: it’s exactly what Tony Blair did when he came to power, reversing the EU employment law opt-outs secured under John Major.

The tactic also somewhat excuses Benn from the charge that his ‘in at all costs’ argument undermines the government’s position: if his party intends to reverse Cameron’s renegotiation achievements, why support them in the first place?

The mirror of this argument, though, can be and is being used by supporters of Brexit. They suggest that outside the EU, the Westminster parliament will have more direct control over Britons’ lives, so will have a greater ability to increase (or decrease) worker protections according to the will of the electorate. From the perspective of a typical Corbyn supporter it does not seem likely that a Cameron or George Osborne government would create UK work protections at the same level as the Working Time Directive or Agency Workers’ Directive, but it is at least legally possible. Neither is the Conservative government likely to fight for Labour goals in its EU renegotiation.

Equally, if Britain does leave the EU but there is a swift backlash against the Conservatives for presiding over a mismanaged exit process, the way will be clear for the next Labour leader to impose domestic social protections that echo the EU’s own, or to bring them to the even higher standards seen in many western European countries. Parliament would have ultimate policy freedom, and also ultimate responsibility – the lack of EU accountability was a constant bête noire for Benn’s father, Tony. If Brexit is mismanaged poorly enough, public opinion might actually force Labour to rejoin the EU, probably without the many opt-outs Britain now enjoys. The employment law debate won’t end any time soon.