»Comment:

THE Welsh economy depends more on exports to EU countries than any other part of the UK, so it is absolutely right that Carwyn Jones and Leanne Wood should work together to explain why tarifffree participation in the Single European Market is so important.

It’s highly unusual for an opposition party leader to join with a head of government to launch a controversial policy document. But these are circumstances that are far from ordinary.

In setting out her priorities for Brexit negotiations last week, Theresa May argued that the UK should pull out of the Single Market, claiming that is what people voted for last June. Yet the only question on the ballot paper was whether the UK should retain its membership of the EU.

People’s reasons for voting to leave were varied, but it is unlikely that a significant number did so to have tariffs imposed on Welsh exports. It’s true that many Leave voters had concerns about immigration, although there is irony in the fact that many areas with a Leave majority have been subject to very low levels of migration. Be that as it may, the UK Government has decided to prioritise such concerns above what is surely its overriding responsibility to protect the economy.

Its motive appears to be to appease those of its supporters who might otherwise defect to Ukip.

Labour has been conflicted over the issue of immigration. While most of its politicians and activists would instinctively oppose restricting the rights of EU citizens to live and work here, there’s no doubt the party has been spooked by the leaching of support to Ukip and the number of Labour supporters who voted Leave.

It’s in this context that the Welsh Government has been contemplating how to deal with concerns about immigration without jeopardising its target of “unfettered access” to the Single Market.

At first sight this seems like a circle that cannot be squared – and that may in fact eventually turn out to be the case.

One of the EU’s four freedoms is freedom of movement, and without accepting it a country will be excluded from full access to the Single Market. Mr Jones and Ms Wood will be suggesting that the UK has gone further than it need have done in applying the freedom of movement principle.

It will be interesting to see the detail of the argument, but it is likely to hinge on a distinction between freedom to work and freedom to claim benefits.

Mr Jones has previously argued that the UK should be allowed a moratorium on new migrants from Eastern Europe of the kind claimed by most longstanding EU countries when a new crop of countries joined the organisation in 2004.

There are already those who are deriding this initiative as futile –that Mrs May will pursue a hard Brexit regardless. But politicians have a duty to argue passionately for causes they believe in – more so when they believe another course would have disastrous consequences.

In rising above party tribalism, Carwyn Jones and Leanne Wood are doing the right thing.