Steve Baker: “I’ll celebrate Brexit when it’s been a success”
10 min read
As the EU Withdrawal Bill begins its journey through the House of Lords, peers are gearing up for what could be a bitter constitutional battle. But the minister who steered the crucial legislation through the Commons is optimistic that progress can made – and “legal chaos” can be avoided. Steve Baker talks to Sebastian Whale
A eurosceptic standoff took place as MPs entered the voting lobbies at third reading of the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. The legislation, which repeals the EU Communities Act 1972, has long been the Holy Grail for those opposed to the UK’s membership of the European Union. Conservative MPs Steve Baker and Sir Bill Cash each wanted to be last through the aye lobby as the bill completed its initial passage through the Commons.
“When you really care about a vote and a bill, there’s something about being the last out of the lobbies,” says Baker. “It’s always the whips who are absolutely last and declare the lobby empty, but I intended to be last out of the aye lobby on third reading. But Bill was waiting to be last, and he sort of insisted by gesture that I should go. And of course, in deference to him I did.”
The bill became doubly significant for Baker in June of last year, when he was made responsible for its Commons journey after being appointed a minister in the Department for Exiting the European Union (DExEU). And it is one of Whitehall’s newest haunts where we meet on a dreary January morning.
The rain and dark clouds that linger in an obvious yet pleasing metaphor have made no dent on Baker’s boundless optimism. It takes little time to ascertain why the 46-year-old is so unfailingly positive. He speaks of the exertion to secure the “cause” of Brexit; how his friend Sir Bill Cash “struggled” for decades to repeal the European Communities Act and his own “struggle” to secure a referendum. In many ways it seems the dust is still settling for Baker; he reveals he has yet to celebrate the Brexit vote. “I’ve always understood it would be complicated and difficult. And I’ll celebrate when it’s been a success.”
The words round peg, round hole spring to mind as he says he has never enjoyed his work more than as a Brexit minister. How has he found the switch to the frontline?
“I’ve adjusted much more easily than I would ever have dreamt possible. It’s been a huge privilege to be asked to join the government at this time. It is after all what I campaigned for. So, I thought it would have been very bad manners if I had not agreed when the Prime Minister asked me,” he says, as we sit at a grand wooden meeting table at DExEU, accessible only through entering a code on a secure door.
The role is Baker’s first ministerial post, and one he never foresaw when he entered politics eight years ago. “I knew I’d be rebelling in order to struggle to get a referendum. As a consequence, I did not expect to be a minister, no.”
Baker had a successful career in business as a software engineer and consultant, which included a stint working for Lehman Brothers before its demise (“nothing to do with me,” he quips). This came after ten years as an engineering officer in the RAF. The handling of the Lisbon Treaty inspired Baker to enter politics. He was elected MP for Wycombe in 2010, succeeding Paul Goodman, now editor of ConservativeHome.
While posing for pictures, Baker alerts me to an old tradition in his constituency. The local MP, mayor and other city officials are weighed each year to ensure they are not being profligate with taxpayers’ money. I’m somewhat perplexed as Baker says he shed two stone in one fell swoop two years outside of the 2015 general election and didn’t think to spread out the weight loss for maximum impact.
It does seem an oversight for someone renowned for his strategic approach. He quickly became a thorn in the side of David Cameron on the vexed question of the EU, playing his part in forcing the former PM to commit to a referendum in his famous Bloomberg speech which fortuitously had its fifth anniversary on the day we meet.
But Baker rails against the notion of being a one-time awkward backbencher. “I’d like to think that I’d been principled. I never sought to be awkward for its own sake and I have strong views about democracy and upholding it. So, I voted according to my best judgment of how to further that cause of getting a referendum.”
As Cameron presented a draft of Britain’s proposed new relationship with Brussels in February 2016, rather than rehash his opposition to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice, Baker, a member of Vote Leave, tried a different tack. In the Commons Chamber, he accused the then Tory leader of attempting to “polish poo”. Now on the frontbench, does he have more sympathy for prime ministers returning from Brussels after a round of negotiations with the European Union?
“I don’t think that I was necessarily being unsympathetic at the time,” he says, with mild embarrassment. “The reality is it was the most effective thing I’ve ever done in politics. I got a week’s coverage out of that. I didn’t like doing it because it was coarse, it was vulgar. Unfortunately, it was necessary.”
Latterly Baker chaired the influential European Research Group (ERG), a publicly-funded organisation within the Conservative party that includes backbench and frontbench Members of Parliament. Suella Fernandes, his successor, this month joined him at DExEU with Jacob Rees-Mogg (“a very thoughtful and civilised man”) appointed chair of the group in her stead. Are he and Fernandes the ERG’s representatives on the frontbench?
“No, that’s not the case. We are as government ministers bound by collective responsibility like everybody else and glad to be. I have slotted into the system as it is. But equally, you would expect a Conservative MP in a ministerial office to remain in touch with backbench opinion.
“One of the things that I need to do is make sure that I’m as in touch with people across the spectrum of opinion on Europe as I have been with the Eurosceptics.”
A report in the Daily Telegraph ahead of the reshuffle said that Baker was being lined up to take on the role of ‘minister for no deal’, a position he suggests he already fulfils as minister responsible for domestic preparedness.
“The minister for no deal is a journalistic style. I’ve had these same responsibilities since I was appointed, including being the minister responsible for contingency planning," he explains.
“I’d prefer to say I’m the minister for all deals. I’m the minister to make sure that we are domestically prepared whether we leave in our preferred and expected scenario of an agreement, or if we reach the unfortunate circumstances of needing contingency and leaving without a deal. So, in a sense I do fulfil that role, and I am on the relevant cabinet sub-committee.”
How does he view the prospect of a no-deal Brexit? “I’ve said in the House what I believe to be true, is that we’ve got nothing to fear from trading in the world on the basis of controlling our own tariffs, our own regulations, our own relations with the rest of the world.
“But, if we were to agree nothing, that would not be as good as agreeing a good quality, deep and special partnership across a wide range of areas which is what we’re setting out to do and what we expect to achieve.”
Baker is preparing to brief his colleague Lord Callanan as he transfers over responsibility for the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, before it sets sail for the Upper House. Reflecting on its initial phase through the Commons, Baker says that despite one defeat on a meaningful vote on the final Brexit deal with the EU, he is “very proud of the way we’ve carried it through”.
“So, I believe their Lordships will receive a bill that has been well scrutinised and is in good condition, with I don’t doubt some areas that they will look at,” he says with typical politeness.
But in the House of Lords lay concerns about aspects of the bill and the powers it will grant to ministers. Does Baker foresee a protracted game of “ping pong”, where the Lords amend the legislation and send it back to the Commons for further consideration? He believes that the convention the elected house “gets its way in the end” and the need to transpose EU law into UK statute before March 2019, as per the purpose of the bill, means there will not be a protracted toing and froing between the two houses.
But there are peers deeply opposed to Brexit and the direction of travel pursued by the government, and the Tories do not hold a majority in the Lords. Baker stresses that Brexit cannot be derailed through the legislation, and argues peers would not countenance allowing the UK’s statute books to “have holes in it”.
“I approach this bill going into the House of Lords in a spirit of optimism, with greater optimism actually than I did when it went into the House of Commons,” he says.
“I do genuinely believe that the House of Lords takes seriously its responsibilities to scrutinise legislation; is committed to the rule of law and therefore will scrutinise this bill and pass it back to us in a condition which is working and I am optimistic about that. Now, if there are some peers who take another view, that will be very interesting to see.
“But, I will be surprised if there is a majority in the House of Lords to wreck this bill, very surprised, because again, you can’t stop us leaving the European Union by wrecking this bill. You can only ensure that we leave the EU in a state of legal chaos. I don’t suppose very many members of the House of Lords will want to be seen to be responsible for creating legal chaos.”
Does Baker support calls for Theresa May to appoint a number of new Tory peers if ministers cannot get the legislation through? “That’s not the territory that the government wants to be on. We want to treat them with dignity and respect and genuinely honour the fact they take seriously their scrutiny duties.”
There is a common thread of seeking to do the right thing with Baker. He is committed and loyal – he refers continually to collective responsibility and has adjusted to its constraints (and rewards) of ministerial life with ease. In November Baker leapt to the defence of 15 of his Tory colleagues outed by the Daily Telegraph as potential “mutineers” over the EU (Withdrawal) Bill. “Parliamentarians are entitled to do what they think is best for our country. If I thought or said anything other than that, I would be a hypocrite,” he says with great sincerity.
And though an enthused and effective campaigner for Brexit, his cordial approach meant a frontbench job wasn’t completely out of reach.
“It’s not something I ever expected, particularly as I’ve rebelled a bit in the course of my career on the issue.
“But I suppose it’s the manner in which you do things. I never took a scattergun approach and I think people would say I always did things I did courteously. I suppose that made it possible that the Prime Minister could ask me to take this on.”
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
