Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Big trouble from little Cyprus (Financial Times)

The calamity that has struck the island threatens wider damage, writes Martin Wolf.

2. D-Day Budget for would-be Chancellor Ed Balls (Daily Telegraph)

Labour's shadow chancellor is feared in Downing Street, but he has not silenced doubters in his own party, writes Mary Riddell.

3. Press regulation: a victory for the rich, the celebrated and the powerful (Guardian)

This new press regulator is all about revenge, not justice, says Simon Jenkins. It's hard to imagine a more chilling deterrent to serious investigation.

4. Labour's chance to lead fiscal policy (Financial Times)

The party should commit to reducing the ratio of public debt to GDP, writes Nick Pearce.

5. Iraq war: make it impossible to inflict such barbarism again (Guardian)

The US and Britain not only bathed Iraq in blood, they promoted a sectarian war that now threatens the region, says Seumas Milne.

6. No turning back. And no rabbits from hats (Times) (£)

The Chancellor cannot afford any bold or tricksy stunts when deficit reduction is the only course to pursue, says Daniel Finkelstein.

7. The Budget of 2018: Future governments will have to learn how to do more with less (Independent)

For 25 years, tax revenue has been stuck at around 38 per cent of GDP, notes Hamish McRae. No government has been able to increase it.

8. If they had a scintilla of decency, Tony Blair, Alastair Campbell and John Scarlett would not show their faces in public again (Daily Mail)

The former prime minister and his spin doctor have wrought such tragedy and grief in the world that they should be regarded as pariahs, says Max Hastings. 

9. Will George Osborne make his mark or show himself as unambitious? (Daily Telegraph)

This Budget will tell us whether George Osborne is content with going down in history as an unambitious, steady as he goes apparatchik, says Allister Heath.

10. François Hollande: Mr Normal takes a battering (Guardian)

The French president's promise to stabilise and reverse unemployment by the end of the year is looking like yet another broken election pledge, notes a Guardian editorial.

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.