Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Why Europe is floundering (Guardian)

Its architects envisioned the EU as a model for the world, but current dogma will achieve the opposite, writes John Gray.

2. Why the Tories are ready to risk detonating the Brussels bomb (Daily Telegraph)

Withdrawal from the EU has changed from being a fringe view to mainstream opinion, writes Peter Oborne.

3. Behold, we have a new Sir Humphrey Appleby (Times) (£)

The Attorney-General’s specious reasons for not publishing Prince Charles’s letters are beyond parody, says David Aaronovitch.

4. The Prince of Wales must be free to give his opinions (Daily Telegraph)

Any minister will tell you that the confidence of the Crown is vital for the system to work, writes Jack Straw.

5. The Treasury doesn't know best (Guardian)

Labour rightly wants to reform over-mighty markets, writes David Miliband. But the state also needs to fundamentally change.

6. How much has austerity really cost? (Financial Times)

The contribution of severe deficit reduction is worthy of debate, says Chris Giles.

7. Banning teams is the way to tackle football racism (Independent)

Now is Uefa's chance to send an unequivocal message that there is no place for racism in football, says an Independent leader.

8. Watch out Westminster – council politics just got sexy (Guardian)

We may think we live in a centralised state, but decisions made by local authorities have real impact on our lives, says Zoe Williams.

9. This glimmer of hope could be far brighter (Daily Mail)

George Osborne should be doing far more to help firms seize the chances opening up to them, says a Daily Mail editorial.

10. Malala paid dearly for claiming her right (Financial Times)

Countries that fail to educate females cause themselves incalculable damage, writes David Pilling.

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.