Sunder Katwala considers the role Labour can play in the referendum

The European Union referendum gives the Labour party a rare chance, these days, to talk about an issue where it mostly agrees – and on which it is the more united of the two major parties. Yet many Labour voices are anxious about the vote: worried that the referendum risks going the wrong way, leaving Britain outside the EU; unsure how to talk about issues of identity and immigration in a way that makes sense to people; and concerned that the party could be on the winning side, yet lose forever those voters on the other side.

A new pamphlet from British Future, How (Not) to Talk About Europe, looks in detail at the undecided voters who will determine the outcome of the referendum – and how advocates on both sides need to do much more to reach them if they want to win. Some of that advice will prove useful to Labour voices engaging in the debate.

—First, accept it is happening. Labour members of parliament did vote for a referendum – but only after the party’s general election defeat meant there was already a House of Commons majority in favour. Most voters backed parties – the Conservatives and the United Kingdom Independence party – for which a referendum was a prominent manifesto pledge. Labour voices struggled to engage in the EU debate while arguing against a referendum. The national interest case put by Tony Blair ahead of the election came uncomfortably close to arguing that this is too important an issue to trust to the general public. This referendum is happening – so it is high time for Labour voices to stop complaining that people are only getting a say because of Tory party management, and to get on with engaging in the issues.

—Second, encourage participation. In a national referendum, every vote counts. In the general election, Labour lost some soft support, because voters who preferred the party did not turn up. Referendum turnout could well be lower than that in the general election. Both sides of the referendum will have groups of target voters who could well be supportive, but may not take part at all – younger voters tend to be more pro-EU while ‘DE’ voters tend to be more sceptical. Encouraging participation – particularly among students and other young voters, ethnic minority voters and others in big cities – may be the best referendum role for advocates who are much more positive about the EU than the median voter.

—Third, preach beyond the converted. Many Progress readers will be clear about what they think about the EU – but may not know many people who are not on the same side of the argument. Labour votes will play a crucial role in deciding the result – because they take a rather more mixed view of the EU than most members of parliament and party members. Forty-eight per cent of Daily Mirror readers are currently planning to vote for Leave. The referendum is therefore a crucial test for the party to show it can talk to voters sceptical of the party line and the worldview that goes with it.

—Fourth, talk about immigration. The referendum is a big moment in the politics of immigration. It gives people a big choice about one of the issues people often say they do not get any choice about. But pro-Europeans struggle to talk about the issue, especially in a way that makes sense to those who are sceptical about immigration and undecided about the EU. One instinct is to ‘change the subject’ – simply asserting that free movement is part of the deal of free trade – but that is likely to frustrate the audience. There are also a set of positive arguments about EU immigration: that those who come here make a net fiscal contribution; that Britons get the benefit of being able to live and work abroad too; and that, over the generations, Britain has been a country that has made immigration work, from the Huguenots to the Windrush and beyond. These make sense to those who are economically and culturally confident about immigration, such as most of the Labour graduate vote. But they will not meet the referendum test of being able to engage with those who are anxious rather than confident about economic and cultural change.

Few Labour voices have an ability to engage the most firmly anti-immigration voters – who are usually pretty staunch opponents of EU membership too. But Labour should be able to develop a set of arguments that start from where most people are – that immigration brings pressures as well as benefits – with concrete proposals to manage migration more effectively. The party’s 2015 election manifesto, and the arguments developed by the Trades Union Congress, began to do this, particularly with measures to ensure fairness in the workplace, if less often on cultural concerns about immigration – but there was still a lack of comfort and confidence in owning and making that case.

—Finally: sometimes, agree to disagree. Another Labour anxiety is that the party could help to win the vote for Remain but lose touch with those voters who disagreed, as happened in Scotland after the 2014 referendum. Ukip sees the referendum as an opportunity to take more support from Labour in the north. Britain’s EU membership may not have quite the same existential status as Scottish independence.

Unlike in Scotland – where every party’s elected representatives were solidly on the same side – there will be some Labour voices on both sides of the argument, with members of parliament like Frank Field and Kate Hoey making a Labour Leave case. If Labour’s pro-EU majority has made a serious effort to understand and engage Eurosceptic Labour voices during the referendum, they may also prove better placed to contain the fallout with those voters who decide to cast their own vote for the Leave campaign.

———————————

Sunder Katwala is director of British Future