Peter Mandelson’s speech at the IPPR’s conference on policy priorities for the next European Commission was his second intervention in as many days following the launch of Policy Network’s Laying the Foundations for a Labour Century report. It was a speech from a political heavyweight clearly still passionate about Britain’s place in the world and the Labour party’s role in shaping it.

From the outset Mandelson did not hesitate in challenging Ukip. He argued that Nigel Farage seeks to make the debate over Europe a question of identity, of ‘who runs Britain’, because the economic facts are not Ukip’s priority. ‘We need to keep confronting him with those economic facts’ because they are about jobs, livelihoods and people’s future. Ukip, as Mandelson said, has a definition of Britishness that is narrow, exclusive and ‘reduces our identity to a caricature of ourselves’. His analysis is correct, however it does leave open the question of how the ‘in Europe’ camp can put forward an alternative British identity, which includes Europe. To draw a comparison, the Better Together campaign had far more significant traction and cut-through towards the end of the referendum campaign once it put together a positive vision for Scotland within the United Kingdom. Whereas the Yes campaign solely spoke to voters Scottish identity, Better Together was also able to tie this in with a wider British narrative and character. How will an ‘in Europe’ referendum campaign be able to do the same? While many people self-define as ‘British’, not many consider themselves to be ‘European’ in the same way and there is very little to tie a campaign narrative to.

It is a myth that we can recreate the same economic benefits from outside the union with a free trade agreement on our terms, Mandelson continued. It ‘is an illusion for this very simple reason; about half of UK exports go to the European Union, while only a tenth of EU exports come to the UK… our half versus their tenth’. As Mandelson correctly points out, we need them more than they need us. Nigel Farage and Tory Eurosceptics are foolish to think that such an imbalance would not affect the UK’s ability to gain access to and have an equal footing within the single market.

The global economy has moved on, Mandelson said. The problem with access to the single market has nothing to do with tariffs and trade barriers, but licencing, standards and regulation. Regulation is a ‘living political agreement, it ain’t fixed and cemented in time forever’ he declared, it is constantly evolving.  For Britain to be involved in forming this regulation, which will affect us whether we are in the EU or not, we need to be part of the EU not shouting from the side lines.  Mandelson concludes that leaving the EU would put the UK in the same position as the Normwegian and Swiss governments who, ‘ have perfectly legitimate interests, but because they [aren’t] in the EU, they [aren’t] at the table’ of trade negotiations. There is no third way: you’re either in it or you are out of it and along side.

On migration, Mandelson again provides a passionate counter to the Ukip myths and half-truths. Migrants from the EU, he argued, are ‘net contributors to [the UK’s] finances… they contributed a third more in taxes than they received in benefits between 2001 and 2014’.  While he admits that there is the legal possibility to delay migrant access to in-work benefits without treaty change, to go further and remove free movement within the EU would be ‘cutting off our noses to spite our faces’.

Mandelson’s message is that the UK needs to be in Europe, at the table and making our case, not isolated on the fringe. The speech was a rallying cry from one of Labour’s great statesmen calling for the UK to ‘sharpen up’. It now remains to be seen who from our current crop of political leaders will take up this challenge.

———————————

Stuart Macnaughtan is events officer at Progress. He is a former vice-chair of Aberystwyth University Labour club

———————————

Photo: Policy Network