The highs and lows of a British tennis player

Is today the day?

Oh how we wept watching Tim Henman; so close yet so far. Watching him became an annual, masochistic ritual. We all knew very well that Tiger Tim wasn't going to make it, but we watched, prayed and named a hill after him in the hope that he would end the drought. Every year we got drawn in only to have our hearts broken, and yet we came back for more. Such was the life of a British tennis fan.

June arrived and once again our attention turned to the green courts of Wimbledon, the stats were rolled out and yet again we all dared to ponder whether this was our year. In the first week the Euro's offered distraction for some but as ever England went out at the quarter finals, so to Murray we turned. Murray unlike Henman, in both play and manner, seemed to offer us some hope. A Scotsman on a mission to win a grandslam, rather than merely reaching the final hurdle as he had done so before.

At the beginning of Wimbledon who would have dared thought Rafa would go out in the second round, to an effective unknown? Such is the charm of tennis; you can't win a grand slam in the first week, but you can lose it. Rafa went out and in doing so he paved the way for Murray to reach his first Wimbledon final creating a moral dilemma: who to support in the final? On the one hand, many want Federer to win one more slam, and to prove that whatever Nadal and Djokovic have done he can still do it better. On the other, 76 years is a too long for the British public to wait.

Not since 1938 has Britain had a man in the Wimbledon final, but for Murray to win he will have to overcome the formidable force that is Roger Federer. Is it possible? The stats say yes. In 2006 Roger Federer reigned supreme; winning 92 matches and losing just four, three to Nadal and one to Andy Murray. Murray leads on the heads to heads winning eight out of 15, but he has never beaten Federer in a grand slam. In fact, he is yet to even win a set against him in a grandslam final. All of that was before Ivan Lendl became his coach at the end of last year, though. Murray seems a different player now, showing real strength of character to beat David "the roadrunner" Ferrer in the quarterfinals.

Federer, the indisputable greatest player of all time, has 16 grand slams standing in his favour, to Murray’s zero. Federer oozes style, grace and composure and is loved by tennis fans world-wide, whereas Murray lacks charm and has yet to win a grandslam (or really the hearts of the nation, although a victory would secure that). But one gets the feeling that luck and indeed fate is on Murray's side. When London hosted its first Olympics in 1908, Arthur Gore was Wimbledon champion and became Olympic champion. But maybe we should settle for just Wimbledon.

This is one Scotsman who could be about to make history. Come on Tim Andy Murray!

Andy Murray serves in a practice session. Photograph: Getty Images
Getty
Show Hide image

MPs Seema Malhotra and Stephen Kinnock lay out a 6-point plan for Brexit:

Time for Theresa May to lay out her priorities and explain exactly what “Brexit means Brexit” really means.

Angela Merkel has called on Theresa May to “take her time” and “take a moment to identify Britain’s interests” before invoking Article 50. We know that is code for the “clock is ticking” and also that we hardly have any idea what the Prime Minister means by “Brexit means Brexit.”

We have no time to lose to seek to safeguard what is best in from our membership of the European Union. We also need to face some uncomfortable truths.

Yes, as remain campaigners we were incredibly disappointed by the result. However we also recognise the need to move forward with the strongest possible team to negotiate the best deal for Britain and maintain positive relationships with our nearest neighbours and allies. 
 
The first step will be to define what is meant by 'the best possible deal'. This needs to be a settlement that balances the economic imperative of access to the single market and access to skills with the political imperative to respond to the level of public opinion to reduce immigration from the EU. A significant proportion of people who voted Leave on 23 June did so due to concerns about immigration. We must now acknowledge the need to review and reform. 

We know that the single market is founded upon the so-called "four freedoms", namely the free movement of goods, capital, services and people & labour. As things stand, membership of the single market is on an all-or-nothing basis. 

We believe a focus for negotiations should be reforms to how the how the single market works. This should address how the movement of people and labour across the EU can exist alongside options for greater controls on immigration for EU states. 

We believe that there is an appetite for such reforms amongst a number of EU governments, and that it is essential for keeping public confidence in how well the EU is working.

So what should Britain’s priorities be? There are six vital principles that the three Cabinet Brexit Ministers should support now:

1. The UK should remain in the single market, to the greatest possible extent.

This is essential for our future prosperity as a country. A large proportion of the £17 billion of foreign direct investment that comes into the UK every year is linked to our tariff-free access to a market of 500 million consumers. 

Rather than seeking to strike a "package deal" across all four freedoms, we should instead sequence our approach, starting with an EU-wide review of the freedom of movement of people and labour. This review should explore whether the current system provides the right balance between consistency and flexibility for member states. Indeed, for the UK this should also address the issue of better registration of EU nationals in line with other nations and enforcement of existing rules. 

If we can secure a new EU-wide system for the movement of people and labour, we should then seek to retain full access to the free movement of goods, capital and services. This is not just in our interests, but in the interests of the EU. For other nation states to play hardball with Britain after we have grappled first with the complexity of the immigration debate would be to ignore rather than act early to address an issue that could eventually lead to the end of the EU as we know it.

2. In order to retain access to the single market we believe that it will be necessary to make a contribution to the EU budget.

Norway, not an EU member but with a high degree of access to the single market, makes approximately the same per capita contribution to the EU budget as the UK currently does. We must be realistic in our approach to this issue, and we insist that those who campaigned for Leave must now level with the British people. They must accept that if the British government wishes to retain access to the single market then it must make a contribution to the EU budget.

3. The UK should establish an immigration policy which is seen as fair, demonstrates that we remain a country that is open for business, and at the same time preventing unscrupulous firms from undercutting British workers by importing cheap foreign labour.  

We also need urgent confirmation that EU nationals who were settled here before the referendum as a minimum are guaranteed the right to remain, and that the same reassurance is urgently sought for Britons living in mainland Europe. The status of foreign students from the EU at our universities must be also be clarified and a strong message sent that they are welcomed and valued. 

4. The UK should protect its financial services industry, including passporting rights, vital to our national prosperity, while ensuring that the high standards of transparency and accountability agreed at an EU level are adhered to, alongside tough new rules against tax evasion and avoidance. In addition, our relationship with the European Investment Bank should continue. Industry should have the confidence that it is business as usual.

5. The UK should continue to shadow the EU’s employment legislation. People were promised that workers’ rights would be protected in a post-Brexit Britain. We need to make sure that we do not have weaker employment legislation than the rest of Europe.

6. The UK should continue to shadow the EU’s environmental legislation.

As with workers’ rights, we were promised that this too would be protected post-Brexit.  We must make sure we do not have weaker legislation on protecting the environment and combatting climate change. We must not become the weak link in Europe.

Finally, it is vital that the voice of Parliament and is heard, loud and clear. In a letter to the Prime Minister we called for new joint structures – a Special Parliamentary Committee - involving both Houses to be set up by October alongside the establishment of the new Brexit unit. There must be a clear role for opposition parties. It will be equally important to ensure that both Remain and Leave voices are represented and with clearly agreed advisory and scrutiny roles for parliament. Representation should be in the public domain, as with Select Committees.

However, it is also clear there will be a need for confidentiality, particularly when sensitive negotiating positions are being examined by the committee. 

We call for the establishment of a special vehicle – a Conference or National Convention to facilitate broader engagement of Parliament with MEPs, business organisations, the TUC, universities, elected Mayors, local government and devolved administrations. 

The UK’s exit from the EU has dominated the political and economic landscape since 23 June, and it will continue to do so for many years to come. It is essential that we enter into these negotiations with a clear plan. There can be no cutting of corners, and no half-baked proposals masquerading as "good old British pragmatism". 

The stakes are far too high for that.