-
Which, if you're a "remainer," is a good thing.
I'm not sure. As a remainer I'm coming round to this being either a full on 'in' or a full on 'out'. Anything in the middle seems like a fudge that leaves us weaker than when where we started. What's the point? At least with the full on 'out' you get 'change', as brutal as it may be.
Is Corbyn actually saying 'remain by stealth'?
Howard-
Is Corbyn actually saying 'remain by stealth'?
Does it sound to anyone else like he's properly preparing his voters little by little to a remain position that Labour will eventually take? Once you convince them of a customs union, it's not a big leap from there to show that the SM is sensible too, and once there (and once the Tories have continued to damage and rule out any alternative)...
Not sure if I believe this (and I certainly don't appreciate the ambiguity), but it doesn't sound impossible.
christianSpaceman
The cake point re: Labour (being made by a lot of people) is fine, and Andy's response gets to the point, as I see it. That is, it's a perspective issue. For both the Tories and, potentially, Labour, a customs union is the line in the sand as to where they are willing to go. However, for the Tories, that line is that there will be no accepting of one, and for Labour (again, potentially), that line is that there needs to one. Thus, for the Tories, the benefits of a customs union (and everything else) are unattainable from the EU's perspective. For Labour, further entanglement with the EU may be necessary to allow for/maintain a customs union. That is to say, the Tories have locked themselves into a position in which no cake is possible. Labour, through a customs union red-line, allows for some cake, but it may well require further concessions. Which, if you're a "remainer," is a good thing.