CommentPlus: pick of the papers

The ten must-read pieces from this morning's papers.

1. David Cameron must sweep aside the impostor who stole his act (Sunday Telegraph)

'Calamity Clegg' managed to come across as the candidate of change in Thursday's leader's debate, says Matthew d'Ancona, but we mustn't count the Tory leader out just yet.

2. The battle of the public school boys (Sunday Times)

Dominic Lawson points out that Sigmund Freud had a perfect phrase for the rivalry between David Cameron and Nick Clegg: the narcissism of minor differences. Both are public school and Oxbridge educated.

3. Cam losing it big time (Sunday Mirror)

New Statesman editor Jason Cowley asks whether Cameron will come to regret pushing so hard for Britain's first televised debates. Coupled with unrest inside his own party, things are not getting any easier for the Tory leader.

4. David, face facts - no immigrants means no NHS (Observer)

Still on the subject of Thursday's debate, Carole Cadwalladr argues that Cameron's anti-immigration rant showed that the more traditional Tory values are still alive and kicking.

5. Afghanistan must be debated (Independent on Sunday)

The war in Afghanistan has hardly featured in the election campaign so far, says the leading article. Polls show that the public is unconvinced by the arguments in favour of war. These strategic issues must be raised for the health of our democracy.

6. Does optimism have a place in British politics (Sunday Telegraph)

Janet Daley wonders why Cameron did not mention his Big Society idea in the leaders' debate, since it brings a vote-winning positive dimension to the campaign.

7. This is a radical revolt against the statist approach of Big Government (Observer)

He may not have mentioned it during the debate, but here Conservative leader David Cameron elaborates on his vision for the Big Society, in which Britons are freed from the 'stifling clutch of state control' to shape their own destiny.

8. Surrender now - the army's no place for you, single mum (Sunday Times)

It should not be the role of the armed forces to move in as childcare managers or social workers or flexitime consultants, says Minette Marrin. Tilern DeBique's tribunal victory is a cautionary tale.

9. A test of the rule of law in Pakistan (Independent on Sunday)

The leading article looks at the verdict of the UN committee on the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, which criticised the deficiencies of the Pakistani state. What happens next will indicate whether the country is now any less lawless.

10. So, how do the parties match up on protecting our freedom? (Observer)

The New Labour manifesto asks you to ignore all the suspicion the government has created during its term in office, says Henry Porter, comparing the three main parties' policies on civil liberties.

Sign up now to CommentPlus for the pick of the day's opinion, comment and analysis in your inbox at 8am, every weekday.

Getty
Show Hide image

Donald Tusk is merely calling out Tory hypocrisy on Brexit

And the President of the European Council has the upper hand. 

The pair of numbers that have driven the discussion about our future relationship with the EU since the referendum have been 48 to 52. 

"The majority have spoken", cry the Leavers. "It’s time to tell the EU what we want and get out." However, even as they push for triggering the process early next year, the President of the European Council Donald Tusk’s reply to a letter from Tory MPs, where he blamed British voters for the uncertain futures of expats, is a long overdue reminder that another pair of numbers will, from now on, dominate proceedings.

27 to 1.

For all the media speculation around Brexit in the past few months, over what kind of deal the government will decide to be seek from any future relationship, it is incredible just how little time and thought has been given to the fact that once Article 50 is triggered, we will effectively be negotiating with 27 other partners, not just one.

Of course some countries hold more sway than others, due to their relative economic strength and population, but one of the great equalising achievements of the EU is that all of its member states have a voice. We need look no further than the last minute objections from just one federal entity within Belgium last month over CETA, the huge EU-Canada trade deal, to be reminded how difficult and important it is to build consensus.

Yet the Tories are failing spectacularly to understand this.

During his short trip to Strasbourg last week, David Davis at best ignored, and at worse angered, many of the people he will have to get on-side to secure a deal. Although he did meet Michel Barnier, the senior negotiator for the European Commission, and Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s representative at the future talks, he did not meet any representatives from the key Socialist Group in the European Parliament, nor the Parliament’s President, nor the Chair of its Constitutional Committee which will advise the Parliament on whether to ratify any future Brexit deal.

In parallel, Boris Johnson, to nobody’s surprise any more, continues to blunder from one debacle to the next, the most recent of which was to insult the Italians with glib remarks about prosecco sales.

On his side, Liam Fox caused astonishment by claiming that the EU would have to pay compensation to third countries across the world with which it has trade deals, to compensate them for Britain no longer being part of the EU with which they had signed their agreements!

And now, Theresa May has been embarrassingly rebuffed in her clumsy attempt to strike an early deal directly with Angela Merkel over the future residential status of EU citizens living and working in Britain and UK citizens in Europe. 

When May was campaigning to be Conservative party leader and thus PM, to appeal to the anti-european Tories, she argued that the future status of EU citizens would have to be part of the ongoing negotiations with the EU. Why then, four months later, are Tory MPs so quick to complain and call foul when Merkel and Tusk take the same position as May held in July? 

Because Theresa May has reversed her position. Our EU partners’ position remains the same - no negotiations before Article 50 is triggered and Britain sets out its stall. Merkel has said she can’t and won’t strike a pre-emptive deal.  In any case, she cannot make agreements on behalf of France,Netherlands and Austria, all of who have their own imminent elections to consider, let alone any other EU member. 

The hypocrisy of Tory MPs calling on the European Commission and national governments to end "the anxiety and uncertainty for UK and EU citizens living in one another's territories", while at the same time having caused and fuelled that same anxiety and uncertainty, has been called out by Tusk. 

With such an astounding level of Tory hypocrisy, incompetence and inconsistency, is it any wonder that our future negotiating partners are rapidly losing any residual goodwill towards the UK?

It is beholden on Theresa May’s government to start showing some awareness of the scale of the enormous task ahead, if the UK is to have any hope of striking a Brexit deal that is anything less than disastrous for Britain. The way they are handling this relatively simple issue does not augur well for the far more complex issues, involving difficult choices for Britain, that are looming on the horizon.

Richard Corbett is the Labour MEP for Yorkshire & Humber.