Professor Steve Peers, University of Essex
In a recent speech, Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn aimed to clarify the party’s stance on Brexit, particularly regarding a future customs arrangement with the EU.
Corbyn’s speech emphasized unity and collaboration. He condemned the blame placed on immigrants, intergenerational conflicts, and tensions between different parts of the UK. He stressed the importance of the Good Friday Agreement for Northern Ireland’s stability. Corbyn concluded by promoting a global perspective, stating that being a citizen of Britain also means being a citizen of the world.
Regarding Brexit, Corbyn advocated for a new customs union with the EU after the agreed-upon transition period. He emphasized that while the UK would leave the current EU customs union, it should strive to establish a new, comprehensive one with the EU to eliminate tariffs and avoid a hard border in Northern Ireland.
Corbyn highlighted that this arrangement should grant the UK a voice in future trade deals rather than passively accepting rules set elsewhere. However, he did not elaborate on what would happen if the EU disagreed with this approach or if the UK and the EU had different stances on specific trade deals with other countries.
While Corbyn’s speech briefly touched on non-tariff barriers and their impact on industries like car manufacturing, it lacked specifics about services beyond criticism of the UK’s financial sector. He pledged to invest funds previously directed to Brussels into public services, despite acknowledging the lack of a “Brexit dividend” and the government’s own predictions of an economic downturn.
Corbyn’s vision includes continued participation in certain EU agencies, programs, and a close relationship with the single market, although not full membership. He opposes the free movement of people and seeks to negotiate specific protections and exemptions regarding privatization, public service competition, state aid, procurement rules, and the Posted Workers Directive. While briefly mentioning continued defense cooperation, he made no reference to internal security. Corbyn emphasized maintaining existing labor, environmental, consumer, and food safety standards without explicitly mentioning the EU Court of Justice.
Comments
Corbyn outlined aspects of the EU he supported and those he found unfavorable. His criticisms, particularly regarding privatization, have been addressed elsewhere, highlighting that EU member states with larger state roles in their economies, like Scandinavian countries, exist successfully. Furthermore, the EU is actively revising the Posted Workers Directive, potentially addressing Corbyn’s concerns.
The crucial question is how a future EU-UK relationship, including a customs union, would function legally. Corbyn suggests a unique arrangement with the single market. This resembles the Conservative government’s aim, although they differ significantly on specific commitments. As long as the EU perceives such an approach as “cherry-picking,” it is unlikely to succeed, regardless of which party is in power.
Corbyn’s commitment to a customs union could be a strategic move to challenge the Conservative government, considering some within the party also support the idea. However, analyzing the broader political landscape reveals that there is no overwhelming public demand, particularly among Leave voters, for more free trade deals. This suggests Corbyn might be trying to appease Labour Remain supporters without alienating Labour Leave voters. This assumption is supported by Corbyn’s criticism of potential trade deals with the US and China and the backing his customs union stance received from business organizations like the Confederation of British Industry and the Institute of Directors.
Arguments against remaining in a customs union, such as those from the “Labour Leave” organization (which has received substantial funding from Conservatives), often lack nuance. Claims about protectionism and limitations on global trade ignore existing trade relations between the EU and non-EU countries, including numerous free trade deals. Concerns about negative impacts on developing countries are frequently overstated, given the EU’s free trade agreements and preferential tariff treatment for developing nations, especially the poorest.
While some advocate for abolishing all tariffs, this approach lacks a mandate from either the referendum or the last election and would weaken the UK’s negotiating position. Moreover, this policy, championed by Professor Patrick Minford, would likely decimate UK manufacturing, making it unattractive to the Labour Party.
Whether Corbyn’s speech represents a concrete Brexit strategy or a tactical maneuver remains to be seen. Regardless, it sets a clear difference between the two major parties’ Brexit positions.
*clarification added 27 Feb 2018: I’m referring to free circulation of goods within the definition of the EU’s customs union set out in Article 29 TFEU. That doesn’t mean the same thing as “no border checks”; as the Corbyn speech recognises, a customs union agreement would only “*help* to avoid any need for a hard border in Northern Ireland”.
Barnard & Peers: chapter 27
Photo credit: Grimsby Telegraph