Sir John Curtice’s analysis highlights a significant strategic recalculation within the Labour Party regarding Brexit. This shift is driven by a combination of factors related to electoral demographics, the perceived success (or failure) of Brexit, and the current political landscape.
### Why Labour’s Brexit Focus Has Shifted from Leavers to Remainers:
1. **The 2019 Election Aftermath:** Labour’s ambiguous “compromise” position in 2019, attempting to appeal to both sides with a second referendum promise, ultimately satisfied neither and led to their worst electoral defeat since 1935, particularly in traditional Labour “Red Wall” seats that had voted Leave. This demonstrated the futility of trying to straddle the divide in the previous way.
2. **The “Done” Narrative is Owned by the Tories:** The Conservative Party successfully campaigned on “Get Brexit Done.” While Labour leadership under Keir Starmer has accepted Brexit as a fact, they cannot credibly outflank the Tories on a “hard Brexit” stance. Their strategic space lies elsewhere.
3. **Electoral Demographics and Targeting:**
* **Consolidating the Remainer Vote:** A significant portion of Labour’s core support and potential swing voters (younger voters, urban professionals, graduates) are overwhelmingly pro-Remain. Moving towards a closer relationship with the EU helps energize and consolidate this base, which might otherwise drift to the Liberal Democrats or Greens.
* **Winning Back Disillusioned “Soft Leavers”:** Many who voted Leave are now experiencing the economic realities of Brexit (cost of living crisis, trade friction, labour shortages). While they might not want to rejoin, they might be open to pragmatic solutions that ease these burdens. Labour’s approach isn’t about rejoining, but about making Brexit “work better” through closer alignment where practical.
* **The “Red Wall” is Not Monolithic:** While some Red Wall seats are staunchly pro-Leave, others are more pragmatic or are seeing a demographic shift. Furthermore, voters in these areas often prioritize the economy and the NHS over ideological Brexit purity.
4. **Economic Realities and the Cost of Brexit:** As the economic costs of the current arrangement become clearer (e.g., impact on trade, services, supply chains), Labour can credibly argue that a closer relationship is necessary to mitigate these negative impacts and boost economic growth. This aligns with Labour’s broader economic platform.
5. **Strategic Differentiation:** By focusing on practical ways to improve the UK-EU relationship *within* the framework of being outside the EU, Labour offers a distinct choice from the Conservatives’ “hard Brexit” approach, without reopening the question of membership. It’s a pragmatic, problem-solving narrative rather than an ideological one.
### Will the Pursuit of a Closer Relationship Risk Courting Electoral Disaster?
This is the central strategic gamble, and the answer is nuanced:
**Potential Risks (Courting Disaster):**
* **”Betrayal” Narrative:** The most immediate risk is that the Conservative Party and pro-Brexit media will frame Labour’s moves as a “betrayal” of the referendum result, an attempt to rejoin the EU by stealth, or a surrender of sovereignty. This narrative could resonate with some staunch Brexit voters and turn them away from Labour.
* **Alienating Hardline Leavers:** For those voters who prioritize full regulatory divergence and minimal ties to the EU, any move towards closer alignment will be seen as unacceptable. Labour risks losing these votes, particularly in more rural or traditionally Conservative Leave-leaning areas.
* **Perceived Indecision/Flip-Flopping:** Critics might argue that Labour is still unclear on its Brexit stance, or is backtracking on previous commitments to respect the referendum result, creating voter confusion.
**Mitigating Factors / Why Labour Might See This as a Calculated Risk Worth Taking:**
* **Shifting Voter Priorities:** Brexit is no longer the top issue for most voters. The cost of living crisis, the NHS, and the economy dominate concerns. Voters may be more open to pragmatic solutions that address these issues, even if they involve closer ties with the EU.
* **Disillusioned Leavers:** Many who voted Leave are dissatisfied with the *outcome* of Brexit rather than the *idea* of leaving. They might be open to a party that promises to make Brexit “work better” and deliver economic benefits, even if that means closer alignment on specific areas like trade or security.
* **Labour’s Nuanced Position:** Labour is explicitly ruling out rejoining the EU, the single market, or the customs union. Their proposals focus on practical cooperation (e.g., a new veterinary agreement, mutual recognition of professional qualifications, security cooperation). This nuance aims to distinguish their approach from a “rejoin” agenda and make it more palatable to a broader range of voters.
* **Conservative Weakness:** The current economic struggles under a Conservative government, often linked to the consequences of Brexit, make Labour’s “fix the economy” message more resonant. Voters may be more willing to consider alternatives, even if it involves a different approach to the EU.
* **Electoral Calculus:** Labour’s strategy appears to be aimed at consolidating its pro-Remainer base, attracting disillusioned pragmatic Leavers, and winning over swing voters who prioritize economic stability and practical governance over ideological Brexit purity. The political centre of gravity on Brexit has shifted, allowing Labour more room to maneuver.
In conclusion, Labour’s shift reflects an understanding that the political landscape around Brexit has evolved. While there is an inherent risk of alienating some hardline Brexit voters, the party appears to believe that a pragmatic approach focused on mitigating Brexit’s negative impacts and fostering closer, non-membership ties with the EU offers a more credible path to power, aligning with current voter concerns and consolidating a key electoral demographic.
