Fabian Society paper, with contributions from nine Labour MPs, says party must accept voters’ concerns over EU migration

Ending the free movement of people from the European Union should become a key demand from Labour before the Brexit negotiations with the EU, according to a collection of essays from Labour figures.

Labour must accept that people who voted for Brexit had legitimate concerns over the scale of numbers arriving in Britain from the EU, according to the Fabian Society paper.

Corbyn says huge turnout at his rallies shows he can win an election - Politics live Read more

Gathering contributions from nine Labour MPs, as well as others within the party and from elsewhere in Europe, the report is billed as a chance for the party to start shaping its own post-Brexit narrative, rather than let the Conservatives dominate the debate.

In her contribution Rachel Reeves, the former shadow work and pensions secretary, noted that one study had found migration into the UK exerted a “slight drag” on workers’ wages, but that remain campaigners had refused to acknowledge this effect.



“The remain campaign – and Labour in particular – had little to say to working class voters with whom we, above all the other parties, should have been able to communicate,” Reeves wrote. “We did not offer any solutions to those who felt locked out from opportunities.”

Reeves added: “Immigration controls and ending free movement has to be a red line post-Brexit – otherwise we will be holding the voters in contempt. Subject to that, we need the greatest possible access that we can get to the single market without free movement.”

Also writing for the paper, titled Facing the Unknown: Building a Progressive Response to Brexit, was Emma Reynolds, the Labour MP for Wolverhampton North-East. She argued that free movement must end even if it meant settling for a worse trade deal.

“My constituents in Wolverhampton voted overwhelmingly for leave, and their principal reason was immigration,” she said.

“However, it is my strong view that no future deal can retain free movement of people in its present form. We must argue for restrictions while getting the best possible economic deal in the circumstances.

“This won’t be as good as the status quo but leave voters clearly said that their concerns about immigration trumped their worries about the economic cost of leaving.”

In another essay in the report, the Aberavon MP, Stephen Kinnock, also said Labour needed to reshape its approach to large-scale immigration because it had been rejected by voters. He argued that a post-Brexit immigration policy was likely to involve work permits for EU nationals.

“Some will say managing immigration is a ‘tough’ approach,” he wrote. “If limiting immigrant numbers were the defining objective, I would agree. But it is not.

“The managed immigration approach I am proposing is rooted in leftwing values and anchored in the reality of post-referendum Britain. It will allow us to build an open and non-racist society and help rebuild Labour’s electoral coalition, staying true to the values and pragmatism that have been the basis of our historic successes and support. It is a means to an end, not an end in itself.”

Other contributions took a different approach. Chuka Umunna, the Streatham MP who is a leading figure in the Vote Leave Watch pressure group, argued that Brexiters in the government should still be pushed on the promises they made in the runup to the referendum.

“Accepting the result does not mean accepting the way in which it was achieved,” he wrote. “There is no getting away from the fact that Vote Leave ran a cynical and mendacious political campaign.



“We must not stop from holding the leavers in government to account, and pushing our vision of a positive future relationship with Europe.”



Olivia Bailey, who is research director at the Fabian Society and edited the report, said Labour must accept the Brexit result “and get on with fighting to shape the future”.

She said: “Labour must approach Brexit with a set of clear and comprehensive principles that clearly define red lines as well as opportunities. If Labour doesn’t get its tactics right fast, the right of the Conservative party will be left to shape Britain’s post-Brexit future in its own image.”