Dio wrote:Clearly the right call by May, since the alternative (single market membership without free movement) is impossible.
I wouldn't call it "the right call", as that implies it's somehow good, but I agree that it was the only choice available - and, thus, to directly go for it and try to make it work as best you can, was a reasonable thing to do - because, simply, the Visegrád group (Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia) had explicitly stated that any compromise to freedom of movement would provoke their veto.
Single market access without freedom of movement is an impossible ask. Not just that veto, but the EU had repeatedly made it clear that there will be no circumstances where the UK's deal as a non-EU member will ever be better than EU members. Which is a perfectly logical demand on their side. If the UK profits by leaving, then it would be an encouragement for others to leave too.
Plus the obvious economic reality that you can't allow a country that's not obligated to the trade rules to trade freely in your market. To give the contrived example, you've got laws against toxic substances being used in the manufacture of baby toys - as no-one wants babies to be poisoned - but then you say "hey, country that has no laws against toxic baby toys, feel free to sell whatever you like in our market". The market's flooded with cheap and nasty toxic baby toys. Which both poisons babies and steals jobs / money from the actual EU members.
Everyone in the market has to follow the same market rules or all the businesses will rush over to the country with the least rules and regulations and taxes to make the most profit. It pragmatically has to be a level playing field or it just won't practically work. That's got nothing to do with which country likes which country or whatever, but is just logic and common sense. It can't be allowed or you'd actually break how the Single Market works.
"Words ought to be a little wild - for they are assaults of thought on the unthinking."
- John Maynard Keynes
