Morning Call: pick of the papers

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

1. Miliband and Balls look to the past to plan for their future (Independent)

The Labour leader and shadow chancellor are unusual in having experience of shaping policy while working in opposition, writes Steve Richards.

2. Why has Cameron put us on al-Qaeda's side? (Daily Telegraph)

Just like Tony Blair over Iraq, the Prime Minister has lost touch with reality when it comes to Syria, says Peter Oborne.

3. France should copy Germany’s reforms (Financial Times)

Staying ahead in competitiveness on a worldwide scale must be the priority for France and for Europe, says Gerhard Schröder.

4. Sometimes it’s right to tell voters they’re wrong (Times)

Everyone knows some hospitals must close to improve healthcare, writes David Aaronovitch. Politicians on all sides must make the case.

5. Me-first parents do the rest of us an injustice (Guardian)

Like James Caan, I want the best for my children, writes Zoe Williams. But seeing people in power privileging their own just entrenches inequality.

6. Wash the dirty linen in private, minister (Daily Telegraph)

Politicians’ relentless criticism of their civil servants is bad manners – and bad tactics, says Sue Cameron.

7. How the French lost their je ne sais quoi (Independent)

They see globalisation as a process that destroys individual cultures and identities, writes Andreas Whittam Smith.

8. At last it’s springtime for Britain’s economy (Times)

Barely a month ago, the talk was of a triple-dip recession, writes Ian King. Now the momentum is growing.

9. I admit it - I hog the middle lane. But how will picking my pocket make our roads safer? (Daily Mail)

Bit by bit, our freedoms are eroding under this Tory-led government, says Stephen Glover.

10. Google is this era’s General Electric (Financial Times)

Larry Page has boundless ambition and the capacity to deliver unexpected products, writes John Gapper.

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.