Ed Miliband is right today to warn that Britain is ‘sleepwalking’ into leaving the EU. He is wrong, however, to rule out a referendum which is the only means by which pro-Europeans will be woken from their slumber.
As set out in IPPR’s new report Staying In: A reform plan for Britain and Europe, Ed Miliband is right to recognise that public scepticism about the EU has been ‘on the rise for some time’. Although Europe does not top voters’ list of concerns, sentiment is sharp when people are asked to form a judgement. We conducted two deliberative workshops which showed that Brits are fed up with perceived legal interference, the opaque nature of decision-making in Brussels, the financial costs associated with EU membership, and high levels of immigration.
And there are good reasons for this scepticism. The gravy train of MEPs commuting between Brussels and Strasbourg has become an expensive laughing stock. The EU’s structural funds have been misspent, the common agricultural policy is counterproductive, and more than ever before voters feel like they are being taken for a ride by the EU.
Although it has been criticised as opportunistic, Labour was right to call for cuts to the EU budget and a new emphasis on measures that support growth rather than agricultural subsidies. The only difference with IPPR’s approach is that we think that putting the UK rebate on the table as part of a ‘grand bargain’ is the only way to guarantee a smaller budget. We show that this can be consistent with a smaller net contribution for Britain. Without it, Labour’s position is just howling at the moon.
Miliband should also look seriously at our proposals for a refocused commission. Europe needs a radically better regulation programme to ensure that old laws which have passed their sell-by date are removed and that more is done to test the net benefits of new rules. This audit could examine the state aid and competition rules with which Miliband is concerned. National parliaments should also be given a greater role. Meanwhile, closer cooperation between member states and the EU should only take place were public opinion supports it, as it does in relation to non-military threats such as climate change, organised crime and terrorism, tackling protectionism and the rise of Asia, and irregular migration.
But reform must be balanced with fresh pro-European arguments. From a geopolitical perspective, Britain’s global influence will wane unless we remain part of our regional group. In 2000, Britain was the world’s fourth largest economy. By 2020, it is estimated that it will be ninth – overtaken by China, India, Brazil and Russia as well as France. The EU’s size means that it will remain in the world’s top four economies with China, the US and India for decades to come. On increasingly important issues like global trade and climate change, Britain will continue to benefit hugely from its EU membership.
From an economic standpoint, withdrawal could result in GDP being permanently lower by 2.5 per cent. Worse, leaving the EU would mean that Britain would be unable to benefit further from efforts to liberalise trade relations with fast-growing economies or from the further relaxation of rules across the EU’s service sectors. The right internal reforms could result in a 7.1 per cent increase in national income by 2020 and a 47 per cent increase in exports from an extension of the single market.
Culturally, there are now 1.4 million Brits living in Europe and 2.5 million Europeans living in the UK. Each year, 40 million Brits travel to EU countries while 20 million come the other way. Britain also has proud and overlapping traditions with the Commonwealth, Anglophone countries and the United States but geographically and culturally we remain closest to Europe.
If the party remains on the back foot, it gives eurosceptics, who are already clear about their arguments, the space to make their case. The ‘In’ campaign, by contrast, does not even exist. So firing the starting gun for a referendum in the next parliament and leading the positive case would be the best thing to do to preserve Britain’s relationship with Europe.
—————————————————————————————
Will Straw is an associate director at IPPR and author of IPPR’s new report: Staying In: A reform plan for Britain and Europe
—————————————————————————————
Sadly, I don’t share Will’s optimism in organising and winning a referendum that would centre solely around immigration, and we as a party would be bound to lose – with consequential electoral effects. I also don’t think we need a referendum to enthuse any incipient europhilia.
I do agree that the EU requires root and branch reform and democratisation, as well as addressing a wide number of structural issues as well as corruption; that much is obvious even to an ardent Europhile such as myself. But scepticism has to be addressed as part of a wider range of policy reviews that places us firmly on the benefits the EU can offer our economy. We also need to urgently address the endless lies and half-truths that pour from rightwing media outlets about Europe and the Union. We would fail to do so at our peril.