UK General Discussion: 2017 and onwards, Mayhem

[Blair]

The TIGers now have policy/administrative rolls. A party is becoming more coherent.

Albeit they’ve given people the jobs they want rather than the ones they need.

[YL]

Fiona Onasanya's appeal against her conviction failed today, so there will now be a recall petition in Peterborough.  It's likely to open within the next couple of weeks and run for six weeks; 10% of the electorate (which will mean 7000 or so; we'll find out exactly in the next few days) have to sign for a by-election to be triggered.

Will it pass?  I think the answer is that it probably will, but we can't be sure.  The only precedent is North Antrim, which failed but came close, but is in a rather different political culture.  The chances there were that the sitting MP would stand again and win, which definitely isn't the case this time.  I understand both Labour and the Tories are supporting recall, but it's still going to be something of an effort to get that much of the electorate to sign.

A Peterborough by-election might end up being TIG's first electoral outing, as they are now trying to get properly registered.  I presume they won't try to recruit any of the constituency's recent MPs.

[Silent Hunter]

The TIGers now have policy/administrative rolls. A party is becoming more coherent.

Albeit they’ve given people the jobs they want rather than the ones they need.

Shouldn't personal preference be taken into consideration?

[ingemann]

Ftr it was an honest question - I'm certainly not endorsing May's handling of Brexit...

I get why you don't like Corbyn, if he isn't a anti-semitist, he's pretty much a apoligist for them, he's also pretty worthless in general. But the entire Brexit mess start in the Conservative Party and ends in the Conservative Party. Yes it would have been nice if Corbyn had fought for EU in the referendum. But that one issue I can't really blame Corbyn for saying, that it was a Conservative mess and they could clean it up on their own. The only way we could blame this on Corbyn is if we says that it's his job to save May's deal, which she never discussed with Labour.

[Blair]

The TIGers now have policy/administrative rolls. A party is becoming more coherent.

Albeit they’ve given people the jobs they want rather than the ones they need.

Shouldn't personal preference be taken into consideration?

Sometimes- but of course it’s lead to a vocal defender of the Iraq War getting the foreign brief, a staunch supporter of the water companies getting the energy/ultiliy brief and so forth.

[Tintrlvr]

Fiona Onasanya's appeal against her conviction failed today, so there will now be a recall petition in Peterborough.  It's likely to open within the next couple of weeks and run for six weeks; 10% of the electorate (which will mean 7000 or so; we'll find out exactly in the next few days) have to sign for a by-election to be triggered.

Will it pass?  I think the answer is that it probably will, but we can't be sure.  The only precedent is North Antrim, which failed but came close, but is in a rather different political culture.  The chances there were that the sitting MP would stand again and win, which definitely isn't the case this time.  I understand both Labour and the Tories are supporting recall, but it's still going to be something of an effort to get that much of the electorate to sign.

A Peterborough by-election might end up being TIG's first electoral outing, as they are now trying to get properly registered.  I presume they won't try to recruit any of the constituency's recent MPs.

Helen Clark seems like a plausible TIG candidate, no?

[Torrain]

We can't really rule anything out, and that's part of the problem. No one has a clue what's going, including and especially the people making the decisions.

A serious question that has to be asked is how quickly can we 'recover' from a No Deal situation i.e. revert to pre-existing customs procedures?

As quickly as you can hold a second referendum.

(Unless the No Deal is bad enough that a cross-party consensus emerges for rejoining CU/SM - i.e. Norway - but I'm not sure we should wish for that to happen.)

There is not going to be a second referendum in the near future. Neither the Tories nor Labor under Corbyn have interest to do so. The Tories are too divided and the Brexit hardliners would break up the govt. Maybe Labor would support one, if a Blair-style leader was still around.

If a Blair Type was still the leader , Labour would lead by 15-20 points in the polls

Preach it. I dream of the day a politician of the likes Chuka Umunna, Yvette Cooper, Hilary Benn take the reins of the party. Naturally I find myself a Lib-Dem/Tory swing voter, but if one of those guys took the reins, I'd be open to defecting for an election or two.

[parochial boy]

So, rumours that May is going to delay the vote again... which begs the question, is she taking the piss at this point or something? Like how exactly do you justify this sort of behaviour?

[Silent Hunter]

They're just that at the moment, rumours. She can't really delay this any longer now. Even if the deal were to pass, you'd still need an extension to get the enabling legislation passed.

[Suburbia]

Would Penny Mordaunt be a good Tory leader? She is young, she is a female, and she can last as Tory leader for 20+ years. No?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penny_Mordaunt

[Some of My Best Friends Are Gay]

A quick glance at her Wiki tells me she believes in homeopathy, but other than that I guess she would.

[parochial boy]

Dua Lipa is also a young female. I suggest her

[Progressive Pessimist]

Dua Lipa is also a young female. I suggest her

Nah. Too many new rules.

[Suburbia]

May should resign by April 1.

Boris Johnson cannot be taken seriously.

Rees-Mogg is too boring, too white.

Gove looks like a cartoon character.

Javid or some newcomer (Mordaunt, etc.) would be good.

Johnny Mercer would be good.

[Lumine]

After last minute talks May has claimed to have recieved "legally binding" reassurances on the backstop, and thus her revised deal - which Juncker has also claimed will not be re-interpreted again in any way - will be up for a vote tomorrow despite it being unclear whether the DUP and the bulk of the Brexiteers will come on board.

Seems more than certain she'll be defeated once again tomorrow, but the margin will be key.

The official line is that if the vote is lost Parliament then gets a chance to vote on a No-Deal Brexit or in asking the EU for a brief delay (it's only 20 days to Brexit Day without one), but if the defeat is close rather than the rout she suffered last time then it's likely there will be a last ditch attempt to get it passed with further concessions (probably workers right to attract Labour rebels, perhaps - though unlikely - a firm date of departure as PM to attract Brexiteers) on a third attempt. Hard to say whether another rout may topple May for good or lead to a dramatic shift of some sort.

Of course she could somehow win the vote tomorrow, but barring a series of miracles for May that seems frankly impossible.

[Blair]

It’s all rather ridiculous as the DUP are waiting for the Attorney General to give legal advice, and the ERG (grouping of 80 eurosceptic Tories) are waiting to see what the DUP do. It’s a good lesson what happens when you take yourself up a mountain with stupid demands.

My gut instinct is that about 60-80 Tories, plus the DUP vote against it. There’s not the unilateral exit clause, or time limit they wanted.

But it’s looking a lot better than if you asked me 24 hours ago.

[Silent Hunter]

I still think this is voted down tonight and we end up with an Article 50 extension.

[Middle-aged Europe]

Game Over?

Cox says risk of UK being stuck in backstop remains

Geoffrey Cox, the attorney general, has published his legal advice (pdf) on the assurances obtained by Theresa May.

Here is his conclusion.

In my letter of 13 November 2018, I advised that the protocol [ie, the backstop] would endure indefinitely in international law and could not be brought to an end in the absence of a subsequent agreement. This would remain the case even if parties were still negotiating many years later, and even if the parties believed that talks have clearly broken down and there was no prospect of a future relationship agreement.

I also advised that in the specific case that situation was due to the EU’s want of good faith and best endeavours, because of the difficulties of proof and the egregious nature of the conduct that would be required to establish a breach by the EU of those obligations, it would be highly unlikely that the United Kingdom could take advantage of the remedies available to it for such a breach under the withdrawal agreement.

I now consider that the legally binding provisions of the joint instrument and the content of the unilateral declaration reduce the risk that the United Kingdom could be indefinitely and involuntarily detained within the Protocol’s provisions at least in so far as that situation had been brought about by the bad faith or want of best endeavours of the EU.

It may be thought that if both parties deploy a sincere desire to reach agreement and the necessary diligence, flexibility and goodwill implied by the amplified duties set out in the joint instrument, it is highly unlikely that a satisfactory subsequent agreement to replace the protocol will not be concluded. But as I have previously advised, that is a political judgment, which, given the mutual incentives of the parties and the available options and competing risks, I remain strongly of the view it is right to make.

However, the legal risk remains unchanged that if through no such demonstrable failure of either party, but simply because of intractable differences, that situation does arise, the United Kingdom would have, at least while the fundamental circumstances remained the same, no internationally lawful means of exiting the Protocol’s arrangements, save by agreement.

https://twitter.com/markets/status/1105426875164315648

[Middle-aged Europe]

Seems like the Article 50 extension is all but ensured now:


https://twitter.com/oconnellhugh/status/1105429570814132224

[Silent Hunter]

Indeed. Now to see what price the EU asks for it and how long it is for.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Rees-Mogg is too boring, too white.

Rees Mogg is many things, but this is not the first description that comes to mind lol.

[Silent Hunter]

The man does tweet in Latin.

[Middle-aged Europe]

[Middle-aged Europe]

DUP officially bails on the deal:





So does the ERG, apparently:

1. Yesterday’s documents considered individually and collectively do not deliver “legally binding changes” to the WA or to the protocol. They fail to fulfil the commitment made by government to the House in response to the Brady amendment “to obtain legally binding changes to the withdrawal agreement”.

2. They do not provide any exit mechanism from the protocol which is under the UK’s control. Any exit by the UK from the protocol cannot take place without the agreement of the EU and therefore the position remains as set out in paras 14-16 of the attorney general’s advice dated 13 November 2018 that “the protocol will endure indefinitely until a superseding agreement takes its place”, and that the WA “cannot provide a legal means of compelling the EU to conclude such an agreement”.

3. The suggestion that “bad faith” by the EU could provide a legal route for the UK out of the protocol is not credible in practice within any determinate or reasonable timeframe. The AG’s advice at para 29 was that demonstrably bad-faith conduct on the part of the EU “would be highly unlikely; all they would have to do to show good faith would be to consider the UK’s proposals, even if they ultimately rejected them.” The threshold for demonstrating bad faith before an international tribunal is very high, and nothing in the documents make this a credible possibility.

4. The UK could not unilaterally disapply the protocol by alleging bad faith, but would be bound to submit the dispute to arbitration under part 6 of the WA, and would need a prior finding by the panel of breach on the part of the EU in order to invoke the right under Art.178(2) of the WA to suspend (not terminate) provisions of the WA or protocol. Any arbitration would be at best a lengthy and uncertain procedure which under Art.174 requires a reference to the ECJ of any questions of EU law involved. Even if the arbitration panel found in favour of the UK, para 14 of the joint instrument confirms that it would not enable the UK to exit the backstop.

5. The attorney general’s further advice today (12 March 2019) indicates at para 17 that there is a “reduced risk” of the UK being trapped in the protocol but this is caveated by the words “at least in so far as that situation had been brought about by the bad faith or want of best endeavours of the EU.” We consider that the prospects of such findings against the EU are remote, and note that at para 10 the AG only goes so far as to say that “it is arguable” that the UK could secure termination of relevant obligations under the protocol. Such faint and remote prospects of escaping from the protocol do not materially change the position the UK would find itself in if it were to ratify the WA. We agree with the AG’s final para 19 that “the legal risk remains unchanged that if through no such demonstrable failure of either party, but simply because of intractable differences, that situation does arise, the United Kingdom would have, at least while the fundamental circumstances remained the same, no internationally lawful means of exiting the Protocol’s arrangements, save by agreement.

[IceAgeComing]

At this point the deal is dead - unless she gets a very narrow loss and is able to whip Tories in a quick second attempt or something.  The route forward is not clear at all - I'd think at this point an extension to be followed by a general election would be one thing you could do but then what happens if that turns out to be a total mess?  A second referendum isn't on the cards; at this point I think parliament would vote to revoke article 50 over No Deal and I can't see anything changing on the deal unless the UK dramatically changes their red lines.

The speech also has the atmosphere of it being towards the end of a Premiership; and I would not be surprised if she's gone very soon.