Since the Leave vote hit us, it has occurred to me just how little the political class understands our relationship with the EU pre-referendum, never mind what the public has really absorbed on the subject. There have been many misapprehensions, but the one that really stands out is the idea that somehow we can stay inside the single market while limiting free movement.
This is another thing that – sadly in this case – does not conform to a right-left axis. Boris Johnson, in what is now a rightly infamous post-Brexit vote piece of folly, wrote in the Daily Telegraph about how we would remain inside the single market easily while getting rid of everything we didn’t like. Which both included and did not include freedom of movement (it was a very confused article, if you will recall).
Meanwhile, John McDonnell has got in on the act. In a speech that might even be more confusing than Boris’ shower of rubbish Telegraph spot, the shadow chancellor said that in no uncertain terms, Brexit meant the end of freedom of movement. In the same speech, he went onto to say that remaining in the single market should be the highest priority.
I don’t mind when someone in Boston or Skegness that has better things to think about doesn’t understand the intricacies of this stuff, but Jesus, could our top politicians, such as the shadow chancellor of the Exchequer and the prime minister heir apparent (at least when he wrote the article) at least have some clue about how the most basic things to do with the EU, and indeed the single market, work?
No one has ever been allowed into the single market without allowing freedom of movement. No one. Not Norway, not Switzerland, no one. In fact, the Swiss have been trying to get the EU to budge on this one for the last eighteen months to no avail. To be clear, being in the single market is different than getting access to the single market. Getting access to the single market is extremely easy – you just buy stuff from it with whatever tariffs exist as well as whatever restrictions apply. If you want inside of it, i.e. no tariffs and able to move goods inside of it with no hassle, then you have to accept freedom of movement.
Brexiteers like to speak a lot about the EU drifting away from its original premise as a customs union towards a political project. They have a point here, one I will begrudgingly concede. But equating freedom of capital and goods with freedom of the movement of people is a founding principle of the whole project, right from the start. It was in the EEC’s DNA. On a side note, why someone from the hard-left such as John McDonnell would wish to defend the right of capital to go anywhere it likes while labour just gets to stay put regardless, is way beyond me. But that is a larger question for another day.
For now, I would like to dispel this myth for anyone still cloudy on the detail, right here and now: if you want to be in the single market, you need to accept freedom of movement. The idea that the EU are going to allow us bunch who just went and threw a bomb into the European project an exemption on this are living in some parallel universe. To Leave voters out there: they want to sneak this past you by stealth. Stay alert.
Spot on. Tories hitting the panic button and heading for the EEA. And I suspect that Teresa May will present the country with a “choice” between the EEA and full membership, and then go for full membership (because she’s not a brain-dead ideologue.)
Interesting (& tragic) times.
Does mean that both us Remainers, and anyone (else) who wants to see truth and accountability in democratic choice, would be happy? If England really does want to vote for UKIP with their eyes open and into a clear recession, with regional aid drying up then so be it; I will plan to emigrate toScotland or anywhere more sane. Andrew Chadwick, @chadatom on Twitter also #GEb4Art50
It depends on how May sold the u-turn, Andrew.
I agree Nick and would like to make the wider comment about #brexit happening or not. Firstly executing the Article 50 letter is a binary event. No Article 50 triggering we stay in EU. If it is not done and the political classes think somehow they can weasel word round the referendum result and not trigger this should be done with very great caution. I truly believe this could result in civil unrest. Also I would have thought any MP not supporting Brexit vote in HOC would be in severe danger of losing their seat especially N Labour MPs – a lot to UKIP. Its notable that a PM has resigned as a result of the referendum and all senior politicians from May to Abbott ( Senior ?? – see me Ed) have confirmed Brexit means Brexit. I think the issue of Single market vs fee movement will be the most difficult issue. BUT I can see a route which allows for very low tariffs and elimination of free movement. which means principles on both sides are maintained. The control of immigration is a touchstone amongst Leave voters so anyone who doesn’t demonstrably put in controls will be toast electorally.
Absolutely Nick. But the pther issue is what does it mean to Brits, both those already living/working in the EU and thos whose would like to do so. Or just travel there. The old Top Gear crew produced a video showing that it would have been effectively impsosible for them to do their European features without the current movement freedoms of people and goods.