I am bemused by Labour's policy on Brexit.
The Tories are shredding themselves on the issue, even at Cabinet level, where they cannot agree on a policy to present to the EU knowing that whatever they come up with will be wholly unacceptable to the other 27 member states. If ever there was example to be had of the folly of arguing about angels on pinheads then the Tories are providing it.
There is then an opprtunity for Labour to be the party of credibility. What it has to do is come up with a plan that says it is delivering Brexit but which prevents us falling off a cliff edge, as is widely feared by business and unions alike, whilst at the same time being likely to be acceptable to EU negotiators.
Of all the options readily available right now to achieve that goal staying in the European Economic Area is the most credible. First, it's not even clear that we will be leaving it by leaving the EU. Second, it takes us out of things like the CAP, fisheries policy, freedom of movement and rule of the ECJ, meaning we have very obviously left the EU and ‘taken back control', but it leaves us in the single market (and could have the customs union added) and so prevents economic harm whilst preserving Irish accord.
So you would think that if Labour had the chance to prove that they were in the lead on credibility on every front they would grab the chance to back this option, most especially when peers look likely to back it if Labour decide to support a motion on continued EEA membership this week. But, as the Observer reports, Labour is refusing to do so, meaning that the amendment will probably fail in the Lords. Maybe the best option for a soft Brexit and a settlement in Ireland will fail with it.
Of course it is true that the EEA is not the best option for the U.K. That is staying in the EU. But of the options now available it is a good one. It is likely to be acceptable. It solves the Irish issue. It delivers on the Brexit promise to the greatest degree possible. It preserves our economic well-being as much as possible. And it, most of all, shows the essential ability a potential government must have of finding a route though to a solution on an issue.
So why is Labour saying no? I wish I knew when the reality is that sometime soon it is going to have to stop pretending it can be all things to all people on Brexit. At that point it can either lamely follow the Tories into hard Brexit - which is where they are inexorably taking us - or offer a viable alternative. Right now they're choosing to follow the Tories in offering no alternative to hard Brexit, which has to be their worst option. And that's an abrogation of their responsibility to their electorate, the country and even their membership, who overwhelmingly want a soft Brexit.
No wonder I am bemused. Anyone of any sense would be. Labour has to get its act together and soon, or it like so much else, will be a Brexit casualty.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I doubt there’ll be a coherent Labour policy on anything till the likes of Umunna and Cooper are jettisoned, leaving a coherent, united Labour party. I wouldn’t expect anything to happen till then, if ever.
Nonsense
The leadership decides this
They are irrelevant for this purpose
Which country in your view most resembles this EEA option without free movement?
I am discussing what is possible
With whom are you discussing this?
And where in the literature did you read that there would be ‘economic harm’. There are many papers, including one endorsed by you from Cambridge Econometrics, which show that we will be richer in the future, with some futures being richer than others, but none say we will be worse off than now. Foregoing gains, yes, you can claim that, but this is rather different to being harmed.
I think voluntarily choosing to make people worse off than they might be is to harm
And you’re just being an annoying pedant for saying otherwise
I think your time here is drawing to a close
Much as I would prefer to remain in the SM if EU membership is not an option, that alone will not solve the Irish Border. Cross border Agricultrue and Fish Trade is core business N and S of the border, with milk, animal products and fish crossing the border numerous times a day.
So the CAP/Fish policies matter as well as the necessary Phyto/ Phyto Sanitary checks by DEFRA and equivalent.
Really need a SM AND CU atleast for all goods plus being in the common VAT area. (“IoM option”).
Once we get that far one has to say why ar we leaving…especially if we want financial services too.. then we have to be in THE SM and a CU for all goods.
What’s the point of leaving?
There is no point to leaving
But leaving badly is much, much worse
True.
As for the comment above suggesting we would be better off, we now have a database of over 100 Impact Assessments. Only the Economists for Brexit group suggest we would be better off. All others worse depending upon the model.
Further the underlying assumptions of the Economists for Brexit group as seriously misguided. One of the most recent offerings are modelled on. Brexit where there are No border controls, letting in high emission cars, lead painted toys, substandard food. No costs. Not even regulatory agencies costed in. Only benefits. Decidedly odd assumptions on tariffs that bear little resemblance to factual realities.
Despite businesses giving evidence repeatedly that the removal of such regulation makes it harder and in many ways much more costly to trade.
The Economists for Brexit are plain bizarre.
Actually, they’re wholly misrepresenting the truth
Labour will not move to a pro trade position of any sort with the EU precisely because of the leadership- Corbyn will not budge. He wants out and therefore is exactly like this govt. He’s an idiot.
That is not an argument. I post it only to remind people that such time wasting is usually deleted here.
I suspect that so much of labour’s support in its heartlands is pro-Brexit that LP feel they can’t be soft on brexit without alienating their core support. All those workers at the Nissan factory…
Sometime they will have to decide who they are going to alienate
Almost all their support under the age of 45 will not be too amused with them
“Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake” was Napoleon’s battle advice , which the Labour Leadership seems to be following assiduously. Except, Napoleon did NOT recommend copying the mistake! If Brexit turns out to be a fiasco (and I would say it is now odds-on), Labour will get a sizeable share of the blame. The only Parties who have sensible policies on Brexit are the Liberal Democrats, Greens, SNP and Plaid Cumry. Sadly, they are powerless in the face of the two “Ugly Sisters” continuing stranglehold over British Politics. But change may be coming. Will it be too late though?
Labour has wholly misread this issue from 2015 on – thinking it just a Tory spat
It is
And it is a catastrophic one
Right now they will realise far too late and take a massive hit for it
[…] is no good Brexit. But as I noted recently, being in the European Economic Area may be as good as it gets on […]