Err, yes, this is why we want to leave the single market lads

Because if we leave the single market, whatever the level of access is negotiated, working people across Britain will be worse off and revenue to the exchequer will plummet – revenue the next Labour government will need to bring an end to years of damaging Tory austerity.

The single market is not a simple free trade zone. It is, uniquely, a framework of rules that protects people from the worst excesses of globalisation and unfettered capitalism, in addition to easing trade across the continent. If we have mere access to the single market, we are talking about leaving this framework of rules and achieving mere reductions in tariffs for trade with the European Union.

If Britain stays in the single market, we will continue to benefit from EU laws and court judgments that outlaw discrimination in the workplace; deliver vital rights to workers on holiday pay, maternity and paternity leave, the right to join a union, and much more; protect our natural environment from pollution; and keep workers safe through stringent health and safety requirements. Large multinational companies work across borders to maximise their profits to often reduce these protections; the next Labour government, as a member of the single market, can work with other European countries to resist this and advance social justice. If we leave the single market, and ask for mere “access”, we will be compromised in achieving these goals.

By leaving we can enact ourselves those things we desire and not enact those things which we don’t.

That’s rather the point of leaving.

BTW, Labour Laddies, only by leaving can yu enact your own manifesto at this most recent election…..

14 comments on “Err, yes, this is why we want to leave the single market lads

  1. But we can’t have these things decided democratically. Far better if decisions are made solely by the great and good in the Berlaymont.

    The Guardian: read by people who think another country should be running the country.

  2. Large international companies lobby the EU to make sure that the rules favour large international companies.
    Are we sure this guy hasn’t had a backhander from some large international company?

  3. protect our natural environment from pollution; and keep workers safe through stringent health and safety requirements.

    That explains why Swiss lakes are so polluted and their workers dying like flies.

  4. The continuous consistant argument is “we must stay in Europe because you the British people are too thick, too stupid, to make your own decisions”

  5. Where is the analysis? OK labour say ‘jobs first’- Fine with that so long as i interpret that as economy first- to avoid nonsense of jobs for jobs sake and protectionism.

    So the jobs/economy optimising course is to remain in the single market? This is entirely possible but you know Chukka can you please show me the estimates of trade with single market and without, including a few scenarios where corp tax is the same as Switzerland and a sprinkling of new trade deals. Apart from anything else it would give me comfort me that you’ve analysed it before coming to the conclusion.

  6. jgh,

    The continuous consistant argument is “we must stay in Europe because you the British people are too thick, too stupid, to make your own decisions”

    If we keep importing more thick, stupid people; and we keep encouraging our native thickies to breed more than the non-thickies, then yes, we’ll end up with a population too thick to make its own decisions. We just came scarily close to electing Jeremy Corbyn as Prime Minister.

  7. BTW, Labour Laddies, only by leaving can yu enact your own manifesto at this most recent election…

    Which is why Corbyn decided to back Brexit, against the Guardian and a majority of his party. It also persuaded a substantial chunk of UKIP voters to return to Labour.

  8. Andrew M – and will elect him next election, despite the fact that Labour are now openly encouraging violent protests for political gain.

  9. How is austerity defined? Public spending is roughly at 2009 levels (in nominal terms, without adjusting for population) which makes me question what austerity we’ve had or at least how it’s being defined…

    Tim?

  10. The left is defining austerity as government being a smaller portion of GDP. Which even then isn’t really quite true yet.

  11. Still more defeatist bullshit Charlie?

    It didn’t win him this one and it won’t get him the next.

    We need time for he and his gang to fuck up.

    We need no more cock ups from Dress Up. Which is why she needs to be spending most of her time bound and gagged in a basement cupboard somewhere in the 10 Dumb St Bunker.

  12. We need time for he and his gang to fuck up.

    How long before Momentum begin trying to deselect enemy (Blairite) MPs? As Portillo was trying to explain to Liz (4%) Kendall on This Week: “They’re coming for you, Liz.”

    (I thought Ferrari, N. made a very passable Andrew Neil.)

  13. “The left is defining austerity as government being a smaller portion of GDP”

    So that’s how they do it. It was puzzling me.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.