The core is caution. Sir Keir’s warning about an “island of strangers” derives from political fear, over the rise of Reform and Nigel Farage. It is borrowed language. 

Further, Labour’s leaders still fret that any substantive overtures to rebuild links with the EU may be condemned by critics on the Right and, potentially, unpopular with sections of the electorate. 

Certainly, those critics are poised.  The Tories have billed next week’s talks as the “surrender summit”. Reform say it is an attempt to reverse Brexit. 

Read more by Brian Taylor

To grasp why those claims are potent, it is important to recall the substructure of the original Brexit debate. 

After conceding the 2016 referendum, David Cameron sought to redraw aspects of the UK’s formal relationship with Brussels. 

But that was a fundamental mistake. Brexit was never about constitutional minutiae. It was about the nature of British or, more precisely, English identity.  It was about immigration. 

Of course, there is gut racism at the core of some complaints about immigration.  But for most it is less visceral.  It is querulous disquiet about what it means to be English in today’s society. 

That underlying, inchoate concern features in three areas.  England’s place in the UK, previously ignored.  England / Britain’s place in the EU.  And, above all, immigration. 

The Prime Minister is aware of that – and responds.  Hence his caution ahead of next week’s summit.  Like the King in the Scottish play, he would take steps – but dare not go too far. 

Why, say critics, do you vaunt limited trade deals with the US and India, yet appear to hesitate over rebuilding economic relations with the EU?  Because of how such moves might be interpreted. 

Ahead of the talks, the SNP and the LibDems say away with such caution. For example, SNP MP Stephen Gethins urges return to the EU single market and customs union. 

But no such language emanates from Downing Street.  There is talk of ameliorating trade by, for example, accelerating border checks on food. 

There is talk of enhancing economic co-operation as part of a wider security agreement.  The substantial prize is a €150bn joint defence fund.  But, even as that prize is claimed, there are disclaimers.  This will not replicate or replace NATO – even though that organisation’s principal backer, the US, seems presently disengaged. 

Stephen Gethins (Image: free) In Scotland, in particular, we should also watch out for one further aspect of the summit.  Will the UK have to concede continued EU access to our fishing waters? 

It would seem so from the words of the EU’s negotiator, Kaja Kallas, who noted: “We are over the fish.”  Maybe that is the case – but stand by for a fisheries fissure when details emerge. 

There is a further summit agenda item which raises the issue of immigration directly.  That is the possibility of facilitating youth travel between the European bloc and the UK.  In effect, replicating rights which were lost at Brexit. 

In keeping with political caution, the initial UK response was notably cool.  But that has shifted.  Now the talk is of a limited scheme.  With time and number constraints.  Not, repeat not freedom of movement in any shape or form. 

Again, that caution is a Brexit echo.  Leavers believed it when they were told that the UK would “take back control of our borders.”  (A phrase eerily echoed by the PM this week.) 

Post Brexit, arrivals from the EU duly declined – but immigration from the remainder of the planet rose sharply.  As part of what the PM calls “a squalid chapter” in our recent history. 

Hence that caution over anything which might be interpreted as running counter to border control.  Nigel Farage said he enjoyed the PM’s speech – but not that much.  He still forecasts the immigration curbs will fail. 

Which is a potential problem for the Prime Minister, if indeed net migration stays high.  Even although the PM has declined to set targets.  That is what happens when you are making plans for Nigel. 

But there is a problem right now for Anas Sarwar.  Indeed, it is the fundamental dilemma confronting Scottish Labour.  In the face of contentious UK Government decisions, do they acquiesce or rebel? 

This week, Mr Sarwar attempted a blend of both.  He backed immigration constraints – but, pursued by the mischievous media, declined to repeat the PM’s rhetoric. 

Read more

Instead, he rightly pointed out that the UK plan included fast-track treatment for skilled and talented individuals who could come to these shores to benefit our economy. 

Still, in terms of overall tone, it is all a far cry from the Fresh Talent initiative pursued by Jack McConnell, the former Labour First Minister, who extended visas for foreign graduates to stay and work in Scotland. 

Now, there are pragmatic consequences for Scotland.  The care sector says it will suffer recruitment problems.  The First Minister said it would be “catastrophic”.  Further, as The Herald disclosed, Scottish universities fear an £85m bill for additional taxes on foreign student fees. 

But there is also an ideological and philosophical argument.  It is claimed that the UK approach to immigration runs contrary to underlying Scottish values.

The SNP’s Angus Robertson made precisely that point in a Holyrood debate.  The Liberal Democrats condemn the PM’s “divisive” approach.  The Greens say he does not speak for Scotland. 

But is that entirely true?  Is Scotland an entirely welcoming and open nation?  Is there no entrenched racism or xenophobia here? 

To be fair, I do not assume that to be the case advanced by the PM’s critics.  Rather, they mostly argue that the default position in Scotland is more liberal than the position advanced by the PM. 

On balance, that may be right.  But there are some contrary indicators too.  Some questions here about net migration.  Some doubts about Scotland in the EU. 

People here may not be ready to cry “stranger danger”.  But they may expect pragmatic answers to their concerns. 

Brian Taylor is a former political editor for BBC Scotland and a columnist for The Herald. He cherishes his family, the theatre - and Dundee United FC