Labour cake is the best cake

In December 2015, when Daniel Hannan came out with yet another of his smooth but ridiculous  Brexit prescriptions, the only thing to say was, "all we want is the good bits and none of the bad bits". Over the months that became the referendum campaign that formula came out again and again, in a variety of contexts and with various names attached, but the message was the same - we can get everything we want, and we won't have to give anything back.

In early 2017 David Davis, by now DExEU secretary, told us his Brexit would "deliver the exact same benefits as we have" now, and everybody laughed. But Labour decided it was too good a slogan to waste, and stuck it in their collection of six tests. So now we had a Brexit on the opposition side, completely devoid of detail but at least as good as what we have now as an EU member state. After all, there were five other tests. We start with exactly the same. The others must add to that, mustn't they?

****

Philip Hammond was rather rude about Labour's tests on Thursday. "Labour calls for a Brexit that delivers the 'exact same benefits' as we currently have. That is called remaining in the European Union and it means being in the single market as well as the customs union, and last time I checked that was not Labour policy. A customs union alone would not deliver those 'exact same benefits'. It would not maintain supply chains, remove regulatory checks and non-tariff barriers, or deliver frictionless borders. So Labour’s policy fails its own test."

****

But Corbyn wasn't listening. His Brexit, would bring a "new, comprehensive customs union with the EU, with a British say in future trade deals". The UK would move from being one voice in 28 in a customs union to one voice in two. It would "remove the threat of different parts of the UK being subject to separate regulations" at least as far as customs arrangements go, and "deal with the large majority of problems the backstop is designed to solve". Perhaps it would, perhaps it could, perhaps it might, but Michel Barnier doesn't have the competence to negotiate a permanent, full-featured customs union under Article 50. The temporary, bare-bones affair in the proposed withdrawal agreement was enough of an undesirable stretch.

On top of that would come "a new and strong relationship with the single market that gives us frictionless trade" - why didn't anybody else think of that? - "while setting migration policies to meet the needs of the economy". With a wave of a socialist wand (and a Tory immigration policy) the indivisible four freedoms are divided, and just two adjectives from the Tory motivation bag - "new and strong" - are enough to do the job. There's no need for sordid details like How?

We're told that Labour people find a much better reception in Brussels (perhaps because their hosts only have to be polite when there's no actual negotiation to be done) but we're never told that any of this stuff is acceptable to anybody. And again, it's not something for Article 50.

The bag of rainbow drops is bottomless - "existing EU rights at work, environmental standards and consumer protections will become a benchmark to build on" because after all, "these rights and protections, whether on chlorinated chicken or paid holidays, are what people actually want". This is all for the UK government to decide anyway. The only reason any of it might be in a treaty is to prevent us exploiting a close relationship with the EU and still driving standards down to gain competitive advantage.

And it's for now! "It’s a plan that can be negotiated with the EU, even at this late stage, with most of the building blocks already in place". Which building blocks are those then? The features of EU membership, or what May has put together over the last two years? And (it's that wand again) it will "command a majority in parliament and bring the country together".

Once May's package has been voted down, all we need is a general election, but if the swine on the other side won't cooperate "all options must be on the table", including "Labour's alternative and, as our conference decided in September, the option of campaigning for a public vote to break the deadlock". All options, when there's been no election (let alone a Labour victory), and Corbyn's in no position to do anything about any of them.

****

If any of the Labour representatives have broached this "plan" in Brussels I'm sure they've been told that it's all for the future, when Michel Barnier is well out of the way. To have a go at these ideas the UK would first have to leave the EU, preferably with a withdrawal agreement, which might as well be the one they plan to vote down next Tuesday because it would need all the same features. Including a backstop.