Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Don't blame the ratings agencies for the eurozone turmoil (Guardian)

Europe and the eurozone are strangling themselves with a toxic mixture of austerity and a structurally flawed financial system, says Ha-Joon Chang.

2. The SNP can't make the rules and be the ref (Times) (£)

When it comes to the vote it will be about the questions the Nationalists refuse to answer, says Jim Murphy.

3. For too many African-Americans, prison is a legacy passed from father to son (Guardian)

Today is Martin Luther King Day, writes Gary Younge. But with more African-American men facing jail than were enslaved in 1870, there is little to celebrate.

4. What happens when even your supporters don't believe in you? (Independent)

The problem is that Ed Miliband is too clever, unlike Neil Kinnock, who didn't seem clever enough, says Mary Ann Sieghart.

5. There is a golden opportunity to be seized in Asia (Daily Telegraph)

A strong relationship with Asia is a central part of the government's economic strategy, writes George Osborne.

6. After the downgrades comes the downward spiral (Financial Times)

The eurozone has exhausted its toolkit, says Wolfgang Munchau.

7. The only way to save the Union is to stop throwing cash at the Scots - and treat them as equals (Daily Mail)

Cameron should reduce or abolish altogether those anachronistic subsidies from Westminster, argues Melanie Phillips.

8. The Costa Concordia disaster highlights the dangers of super-sized cruise ships (Guardian)

Rapid developments in passenger shipping have not kept pace with safety requirements: this is a wake-up call to the industry, says Andrew Linington.

9. The Church of England needs to forget its silliness about homosexuality (Independent)

The Church's double-speak condemns people to a life without the joy of sexual intimacy, says Chris Bryant.

10. When a Tea Party-style folly comes to Nigeria (Financial Times)

Petrol-subsidy protests are against much needed reform, writes Paul Collier.

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn gets right about the single market

Technically, you can be outside the EU but inside the single market. Philosophically, you're still in the EU. 

I’ve been trying to work out what bothers me about the response to Jeremy Corbyn’s interview on the Andrew Marr programme.

What bothers me about Corbyn’s interview is obvious: the use of the phrase “wholesale importation” to describe people coming from Eastern Europe to the United Kingdom makes them sound like boxes of sugar rather than people. Adding to that, by suggesting that this “importation” had “destroy[ed] conditions”, rather than laying the blame on Britain’s under-enforced and under-regulated labour market, his words were more appropriate to a politician who believes that immigrants are objects to be scapegoated, not people to be served. (Though perhaps that is appropriate for the leader of the Labour Party if recent history is any guide.)

But I’m bothered, too, by the reaction to another part of his interview, in which the Labour leader said that Britain must leave the single market as it leaves the European Union. The response to this, which is technically correct, has been to attack Corbyn as Liechtenstein, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland are members of the single market but not the European Union.

In my view, leaving the single market will make Britain poorer in the short and long term, will immediately render much of Labour’s 2017 manifesto moot and will, in the long run, be a far bigger victory for right-wing politics than any mere election. Corbyn’s view, that the benefits of freeing a British government from the rules of the single market will outweigh the costs, doesn’t seem very likely to me. So why do I feel so uneasy about the claim that you can be a member of the single market and not the European Union?

I think it’s because the difficult truth is that these countries are, de facto, in the European Union in any meaningful sense. By any estimation, the three pillars of Britain’s “Out” vote were, firstly, control over Britain’s borders, aka the end of the free movement of people, secondly, more money for the public realm aka £350m a week for the NHS, and thirdly control over Britain’s own laws. It’s hard to see how, if the United Kingdom continues to be subject to the free movement of people, continues to pay large sums towards the European Union, and continues to have its laws set elsewhere, we have “honoured the referendum result”.

None of which changes my view that leaving the single market would be a catastrophe for the United Kingdom. But retaining Britain’s single market membership starts with making the argument for single market membership, not hiding behind rhetorical tricks about whether or not single market membership was on the ballot last June, when it quite clearly was. 

Stephen Bush is special correspondent at the New Statesman. His daily briefing, Morning Call, provides a quick and essential guide to domestic and global politics.