Westministenders. Whilst Boris makes more daft promises, a50 hits the courts. Poo and Fan Time.

[RedToothBrush]

There is no plan. Or is there?

We’ve talked on the last thread about how it’s being set up as ‘Hard Brexit’ or ‘Unilateral Continuity’ (dubbed here as the ‘Off The Top Of The Cliff Plan’) by the hard line Brexiteers either as the plan or the means by which to force a softer deal with the EU (which perhaps seems to be preferred choice of Mrs May herself).

The last few weeks have been plagued by comments by various members of the Cabinet over what Brexit means – comments which are frankly bollocks and show an outstanding world class level of ignorance – and have led to us being laughed at (Verhofstadt head of EU negotiations), facing outright anger and demands for compensation (Japan) and pure bewilderment (USA unless your name is Donald).

And they have been repeated contradicted and undermined by May in response with, the response that this is not government policy and she will not be giving a running commentary.

Thus making the UK look like the world’s leading political basket case whilst at the same time being ‘an excellent place to make new investment in’. Obviously. As long as you prattle the words ‘Free Trade’ a lot a bright new world of opportunity will open up. Just look at the Japanese position on that.

-------------------

But really the reason why ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is still so vague, could be a legal one.

The next step in the Battle for Brexit, is in the courts and over whether the Royal Prerogative can be used to trigger a50 or whether May will have to first pass it through Parliament before she can notify the EU that we are leaving. This may prove to be a big hurdle for the government and one they have a real chance of losing particular the NI case.

The two big a50 challenges (though there are others) come from a cross party NI challenge supported by the NI Attorney General in Belfast and a crowdfunded ‘People’s challenge’ in the English courts. The NI challenge is characterised by a loss of rights and the international agreement that is the Good Friday Agreement, whilst the English challenge includes this as well as other acquired rights and concerns over the devolved assemblies and the Act of Union.

The government’s defence to this, which they sought a bizarre court order to protect and keep secret which was later overturned, is that ministers have better expertise to implement the start of Brexit than the courts (see Johnson, Fox and Davies), that it does not fall under parliament’s jurisdiction and that whilst the Royal Prerogative can’t be used to remove rights, because ‘Brexit means Brexit’ is so vague it’s impossible to challenge use of the Royal Prerogative because we don’t know precisely which rights will be affected!

The case for the government is also being presented by a relatively inexperienced lawyer.

However, some very respected constitutional law academics think the core of the government’s argument is sound, though this might be lost in the ridiculous other defences, the government have put along it. Their lead of the defence is a lawyer, who has little public law experience too.
The government need to win both these big cases, to ensure that they can use the Royal Prerogative. Don’t forget the likelihood of appeals regardless of the first ruling too.

-------------------

Into the political void the Irish PM has stepped in to led discussions into the future of the island, the Japanese have issued a Brexit ‘wish list, the Spanish have staked a claim to co-sovereignty of Gibraltar (something rejected overwhelming in a referendum in 2002) and threatened to block negotiations otherwise, a French Presidential hopeless has kindly offered us another referendum, the USA have reiterated that they won’t do a deal with us until our WTO status is in good order and the Italians have said ‘No chance!’. This is the UK taking back control folks.

At home Ken Clarke has said that May needs to get her act together, George Osborne has said Brexit did not mean hard Brexit and Dominic Grieve has urged her not to sleepwalk into a hard Brexit. The Tory conference looks set for all out Tory War.

-------------------

In a side issue the pro-Brexit newspaper, The Sun has come out in an editorial telling the Government to have the courage to pull the plug on the child sex abuse inquiry which was set up by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary, calling it a ‘farce’ and saying its scope was too wide and unmanageable… It might seem unrelated, but it calls May’s judgment and handling of large issues into question. If she allows it to plow on, it could turn into an even bigger farce and embarrassment, yet if she U-Turns it could make her look weak and have the potential to do the same over Brexit. She’ll struggle to throw Amber Rudd under the bus over the matter, because most of this happened on her watch. This will come back to haunt May. It also starts to question Murdoch’s position and opinion of May. Is this a withdrawal of support for her?

-------------------

In summary, the next six to eight weeks are crucial to what Brexit looks like. It’s time for the shit to start hitting the fan. Brace yourselves for next couple of weeks. Get stocked up on the gin

We are not being led by UK politics anymore nor even internal squabbles really but the courts and outside forces which are shaping what is possible and achievable rather than what we want.

All talk is of a hard Brexit. It might well prove to be the case yet. We aren’t there yet though. There could be some more twists and turns yet.

An article 50 defeat in the courts for the government throws it back to Parliamentary scrutiny, taking up time and potentially watering down demands. It could even produce the result that a50 is deemed not fit for purpose and we have to go back to the EU begging for a new treaty for a way out (which technically they would have to do as they legally have to recognise democratic votes). This might be our only way to prevent a chaotic exit from the EU. This might led not to an exit though, but a two tier EU – a proposal suggested by, errrr Guy Verhofstadt, Head of EU Negotiations – and is very unlikely to prove to be the quick exit by 2020 that Kippers so desperately want. And a second referendum on the deal reached, in order to prove it was the will of the people. It could also prove a threat to the current government and raise the realistic spectre of a rebellion and a vote of no confidence and in turn a General Election.

Of course the EU themselves have a couple of their own headaches at the polls to survive too, whilst the German banks start to get the jitters. And there is the small matter of America having their own Brain Fart in the coming months, which could have a big impact on what happens next.

Yep, this is taking back control folks. What do you mean it feels more like a game of roulette? So might even say Russian roulette.

The correct answer [about NI] is, who gives a shit?
Sadly, a significant number of people in England most certainly don't - including it seems, TM's Government.

On a different note: Seems that Gove and Johnson were at war over an Australian points style system, according to the Daily Mail.
But they used it in a ‘cynical and merciless subliminal barrage’ because British voters see Australia as white, not black. Yet, we are constantly told by Leavers on these threads that they are not racist. Of which so far, I would say one Leave poster isn't, but the rest probably are.

Another choice gem about the cynicism of the Leave campaign:
In another shocking disclosure, Gibbon writes: ‘An extraordinary encounter in Westminster with one of the central backroom figures in Vote Leave. I asked if support was straying into any new cohorts? “Absolutely not,” he said. “Our people are the old, the badly educated and the poor.” ’

But Brexit means Brexit, and if we smash the country in the process, that's OK. Some might think that Johnson and Gove should be hanged for treason - but oh wait, once we repeal EU laws, we might be able to bring hanging back.

Place marking

Placemarking too.

The Grauniad's account of May's speech, just up:
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/02/brexit-theresa-may-prioritises-immigration-curbs-over-free-movement

"Theresa May has given her strongest indication yet that the UK’s exit from the EU will lean towards a “hard Brexit”, suggesting that regaining control of immigration was more important than access to the single market.

Addressing the Conservative party conference in Birmingham, the prime minister also promised that all EU workers’ rights would remain protected for as long as she was in power.

Controlling immigration would be the key basis for departure, May said. The government would seek access to the EU’s single market if possible, she said, adding: “But let me be clear. We are not leaving the European Union only to give up control of immigration again. And we are not leaving only to return to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice.”

Reiterating her announcement that article 50 – the legal device to begin the process of departure – would be triggered by the end of March, May stressed the task of overseeing the negotiations would be entirely up to the government, which would “get on the job” without being delayed or derailed by parliament or devolved administrations.

On the final terms for Britain’s EU exit, May argued that debate over a soft or hard Brexit was “simply a false dichotomy”, mainly put forward by those who had not accepted the result of the referendum.

People were “letting their thinking about our future relationship with the EU be defined by the way the relationship has worked in the past”, May argued.

The negotiations were going to be based on “the freedom to make our own decisions on a whole host of different matters, from how we label our food to the way in which we choose to control immigration”, May said.

She continued: “It is not, therefore, a negotiation to establish a relationship anything like the one we have had for the last 40 years or more. So it is not going to be a Norway model. It’s not going to be a Switzerland model. It is going to be an agreement between an independent, sovereign United Kingdom and the European Union.

Controlling immigration would be the primary concern, May said: “We have voted to leave the European Union and become a fully independent, sovereign country. We will do what independent, sovereign countries do. We will decide for ourselves how we control immigration. And we will be free to pass our own laws.”

Earlier in the speech, the prime minister dismissed the idea of some hardline Conservative Brexiters that the government could walk away from post-article 50 negotiations if they did not go well.

“Everything we do as we leave the EU will be consistent with the law and our treaty obligations, and we must give as much certainty as possible to employers and investors,” she said. “That means there can be no sudden and unilateral withdrawal: we must leave in the way agreed in law by Britain and other member states.”

May told the conference that when the European Communities Act is repealed, the EU law would be converted into British statute, which could be changed or repealed as parliament chose.

She added: “Let me be absolutely clear: existing workers’ legal rights will continue to be guaranteed in law – and they will be guaranteed as long as I am prime minister.”

Earlier on Sunday, May promised to trigger article 50 before the end of March 2017, having also announced plans for a “great repeal bill” to incorporate all EU regulations in UK law as soon as Brexit takes effect.

May told the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show on Sunday that she wanted to give “greater degree of clarity about the sort of timetable we are following” over the process for leaving the EU.

Speaking after May at the conference, the secretary of state for Brexit, David Davis, gave no extra details on how the process might take place, while also stressing that “the clear message from the referendum is this: we must be able to control immigration”.

He said this would be balanced as best as possible with trade: “We’re looking at all the options. And we’ll be prepared for any outcome. But it certainly won’t be to anyone’s benefit to see an increase in barriers to trade, in either direction.

“So we want to maintain the freest possible trade between us, without betraying the instruction we have received from the British people to take back control of our own affairs.”"

Let me be absolutely clear: existing workers’ legal rights will continue to be guaranteed in law – and they will be guaranteed as long as I am prime minister

Interesting that her being 'absolutely clear' then goes on to omit the letters EU; she's just talking about 'workers rights' which could mean something very different to how this has been spun.

but oh wait, once we repeal EU laws, we might be able to bring hanging back.

Do you know, Peregrina, I can't even joke about that because I can see it happening in my lifetime - which is disgraceful.

Only as long as she's PM - well, who knows what that could mean any more. And Chris Grayling clearly said to Andrew Neil "some" about workers' right when talking about the UK reviewing the current EU laws.

And Chris Grayling clearly said to Andrew Neil "some" about workers' right when talking about the UK reviewing the current EU laws.

Even with the EU, this hasn't stopped the UK having zero hours contracts. Theresa May talked about having worker representation on company boards - no mention of that in her speech.

How long will she last? If I were a betting person, I would say, no longer than two years.

I feel quite depressed about May's speech today. The subtext really shows us what she's like:

"It is not up to the House of Commons to invoke Article 50, and it is not up to the House of Lords. It is up to the government to trigger Article 50 and the government alone.
"Those people who argue that Article 50 can only be triggered after agreement in both Houses of Parliament are not standing up for democracy, they're trying to subvert it."

'...I decide what type of democracy you get...'

"Because we voted in the referendum as one United Kingdom, we will negotiate as one United Kingdom, and we will leave the European Union as one United Kingdom.
"There is no opt-out from Brexit. And I will never allow divisive nationalists to undermine the precious union between the four nations of our United Kingdom."

'...I don't care what Scotland and NI want...'

"We are going to be a fully independent, sovereign country - a country that is no longer part of a political union with supranational institutions that can override national parliaments and courts.
"And that means we are going, once more, to have the freedom to make our own decisions on a whole host of different matters..."

'...No more nanny EU safety net for UK workers...'

I feel she will last till the next election. Her popularity rating as PM is higher than the Tories as a whole.

"And I will never allow divisive nationalists to undermine the precious union between the four nations of our United Kingdom."

Erm, that's exactly what has just happened here.

but oh wait, once we repeal EU laws, we might be able to bring hanging back.
The easiest way to know if someone voted Leave was to ask them their opinion on the death penalty. Leavers are very significantly more likely to be in favour of it.

Unless I'm mistaken reading around today I'm lead to believe that May has said she will trigger a50 before enacting the Great Repeal Bill. Is this correct?

This is a little strange imho. Doing the reverse would actually be better for the government - saying they were enshrining all EU law into British law would actually be hard for the commons and lords to vote against with good reason. Who could turn around and say they object to it, if they approve of the EU laws as they stand? It would also pre-empt some of the a50 challenge concerns about rights. The government could really say that they are protecting all rights and therefore the royal prerogative can be used. I am wondering if the ruling on a50 might be something along the lines that they can use the Royal Prerogative provided the Great Repeal Bill has been enacted for this reason too.

I also find it slightly curious that May went out of her way to say that the legal challenges to a50 were against democracy. It almost feels like she is protecting herself again there. Why say that if you were completely confident that you will win the case? Perhaps to pacify those who want article 50 invoked now, but even then you could say similar but be more dismissive of its chances of winning.

The other thing I though odd, was openly all but saying we are leaving the single market, by saying we will no longer be under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Again it falls in with the a50 and rights things.

www.politics.co.uk/blogs/2016/10/02/may-speech-makes-it-clear-we-re-leaving-the-single-market

If we leave the single market, then the NI border with Ireland can not be soft by its very definition.

There is also no mandate for leaving the single market. All the polls currently floating about put the staying in the single market far ahead of immigration if it is a choice, but a substantial amount. Not only this the Tory manifesto says about protecting British interest in the single market.

Whilst at the same time May, says that she will not go down the route proposed by the hard right because she will negotiate with Brussels. This does not fit. That IS completely following the hard right.

Then Donald Tusk tweeted this:
Donald Tusk ‏@eucopresident
PM May's declaration brings welcome clarity on start of Brexit talks. Once Art. 50's triggered, EU27 will engage to safeguard its interests

and the BBC's James Landale points out:

James Landale ‏@BBCJLandale
Interesting: Tusk hints rejection of May offer of pre-A50 "preparatory talks". EU will engage "only once A50 triggered"

This is very much the gauntlet being thrown down against the backdrop of British threats. I can't see much negotiating going on if the EU take that line. This makes a chaotic exit more likely too.

Joseph Muscat ‏@JosephMuscat_JM
#Malta #EU Presidency geared to handle Art50 trigger by @theresa_may. Will be honest brokers for fair deal. 4freedoms cannot be decoupled-JM
And there is a reiteration that the four freedoms will not be compromised on.

Faisal Islam ‏@faisalislam
^Faisal Islam Retweeted Joseph Muscat
EU presidency responds - doesn't look like May is even trying to decouple the four freedoms any more

The one thing she has done, is effectively say that UKIP has no reason to exist anymore though. However:

Kirsty S ‏@KirstyStricklan
Irony dies as Theresa May promises she will never allow ''divisive nationalists'' to undermine a ''precious union'' #Brexit

Which as Nicola Sturgeon points out, seems to be a bit of a daft thing to do. (Also see the a50 challenge in NI and how the Irish President is getting involved because of the lack of British leadership on the subject).

Nicola Sturgeon ‏@NicolaSturgeon
PM going out of her way to say Scotland's voice and interests don't matter. Strange approach from someone who wants to keep UK together.

This blogger, makes the point that May did not mention NI ONCE in her speech. Not once
cedarlounge.wordpress.com/2016/10/02/that-may-speech-and-what-isnt-in-it/
Its kind of an important problem isn't it? Just because you ignore it, doesn't mean it will go away.

This would be NI where they are trying to "subvert democracy" with a cross party iniative with all the parties bar the DUP involved and is being lead by the NI Attorney General and they actually voted to Remain.

Ian Birrell @ianbirrell
Interesting to hear Priti Patel mentioned by May as one of the key Brexit ministers alongside Davis, Fox and Johnson #cpc16

Which is interesting. Especially as The Times Sam Coats points out something else:
Sam Coates Times ‏@SamCoatesTimes
Interesting that Philip Hammond NOT mentioned as a key Brexit minister
That'll be Philip Hammond - the Chancellor. The one in charge of the money and most affected as a department by leaving the Single Market.

It all adds up to a very odd mix. One that doesn't make much sense however you look at it. The only people who could possibly be happy with it, are the hard right of the party. (But then, maybe that's EXACTLY the point...)

It will upset a lot of her own party, who really will not like the idea of leaving the Single Market.
www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tory-group-vows-to-fight-economic-damage-from-harsh-brexit-a7341976.html
Tory Group vows to fight harsh Brexit. (Neil Carmichael MP jokes he's been on the drink - there was only one other MP at this meeting though sadly)

Its going to piss off, or harden the line of everyone who she is negotiating with both in the EU and with the devolved governments. Taking the hard route, since she only has that to move from perhaps is the only thing she could do, but she really could have been a LOT more delicate about it to say the least.

Now about that Witney By-Election...

In other news.

www.itv.com/news/update/2016-10-02/boris-johnson-mistakenly-refers-to-africa-as-a-country/
Boris Johnson refers to the country 'Africa'. This is our Foreign Minister.

Ciaran Jenkins ‏@C4Ciaran
"We start from a position of strength," says David Davis. "We've got the English language.."
Ok... except negotiations will be in French for Brexit.

theconversation.com/four-men-who-will-shape-the-way-the-eu-negotiates-brexit-65576
Background on the four EU Brexit Big Guns.

eulawanalysis.blogspot.co.uk/2016/10/who-exactly-will-take-back-control.html
An a50 piece from a pro-EU blogger.

Europe Elects ‏@EuropeElects
Hungary: #QuotaReferendum invalid as turnout is low (Nézőpont exit poll). Orban's plan to oppose EU's migrant quotas via referendum failed.

Well this is a blow for Brexiteers wanting a domino effect.

"And I will never allow divisive nationalists to undermine the precious union between the four nations of our United Kingdom."

So she is quite happy to ignore a legitimate Remain vote from two of the UK's nations, and has completely forgotten the overwhelming mandate for Remain from an oversees territory? The territory over which it was guaranteed sovereignity that has had a neighbouring country itching to get it back? Guaranteed to comfort the people involved.(Not).

Has she forgotten the Poll Tax? Introduced first by Maggie Thatcher in Scotland, it finished MTs premiership, and IMO sowed the seeds for the current SNP dominance in Scotland. My memory of the SNP from the Winnie Ewing days was that it was something of a fringe party.

Thank you for the new thread, Red. It is all very depressing, although it would be interesting if the lib dems won in Witney... that might shake things the hard Brexiters up a bit, especially as the widely loathed county council is very conservative.

The Lib Dems are trying hard in Witney. It would be a miracle if they won. But (as I have said elsewhere, I think), I know people who have been out canvassing. They report that Cameron is seen to have let the side down. May is not uniformly popular.

Nor is all of Witney the prosperous Chipping Norton set - it contains the big air base at Brize, lots of housing estates, and some prosperous villages. Key local issues are the downgrading of facilities at local hospitals, and the state of public transport.

Thanks, Red - excellent links as always.

Interesting thread on the A50 / Great Repeal Bill. I've included some (but not all comments). Obviously I don't know the credentials of those replying, so pinch of salt may be required.

David Allen Green @DavidAllenGreen
Some are suggesting the Great Repeal Bill addresses the Article 50 litigation. IMO, the proposed Bill irrelevant to issue before courts.

Mike Scott ‏@DrPlokta
@DavidAllenGreen Great Repeal Bill might address it, if they planned to pass the Bill before invoking Article 50. But they don't.

^ RTB: This was also my feeling.

Diogenes ‏@Diogenes1
@DavidAllenGreen Case will be heard long before Bill sees light of day. Court can't take conference speech into account so irrelevant

David Lamb ‏@dlamb75
@DavidAllenGreen if the Bill did address it wouldn't that effectively mean the Government had admitted A50 needs parliament to decide?

GreenDragonReprised ‏@boycottbgbizsoc
@DavidAllenGreen It's an enabling bill that won't take effect until after Art 50 AND the 2 years of negotiations.

Last night one of the lawyers behind the 'people's' a50 challenge said:
Jo Maugham QC @JolyonMaugham
This commitment, if made and delivered, will kill the Article 50 challenge stone dead.

Jo Maugham QC ‏@JolyonMaugham
If I were dead set on Leaving, this is exactly what I would do.

Pass an Act to leave the EU - with the Referendum result still fresh and before the writing is on the wall about what Brexit means.

Once that Act is passed - assuming it passes - Brexit becomes a political inevitability. So - if the Act passes, it's game over.

He has however since backtracked a bit since its be made clear that the Act will come after a50, so the case is still relevant, and the client is still intending to continue.

I was also wondering about May saying that the legal challenge is 'subverting democracy'. This could be interpreted as trying to intimidate those making the case in some way due to her position. This could therefore constitute a problem (remember she made the comment at the Tory conference and not in the HoC so is not protected by parliamentary privilege...)

If I was the NI lot, I would be particularly pricking up my ears on that one, and maybe looking into that.

I do wonder how much of this is posturing to appease the right wing at the Tory party Conference? IMO it's very little to show for 100 days work.

I wonder how much of a bubble TM is in? At the moment most of her MPs are going along with Brexit means Brexit, but opposition is building outside Westminster. Although as yet, we don't speak loud enough with a coherent enough voice.

I agree Peregrina, not a lot going on. And saying she won't reveal everything as they go along is a brilliant way of disguising very little action.

So how DO we speak with a louder voice? I don't know how many people read this blog, but there must be a potential 'movement' here.

I am reading this compulsively and everyone I know is extremely worried and feeling quite powerless, so I think the potential movement is there!

So how DO we speak with a louder voice? I don't know how many people read this blog, but there must be a potential 'movement' here.

One of the issues has been that many prominent remainers have their hands tied by belonging to a party that is fundamentally not prepared to fight Brexit. This is why cross-party groups like vote leave watch are so ineffective.

I've just joined the Lib Dems.

As Nicola Sturgeon tweeted....

Labour are being useless and ineffective as the opposition, they could be having a field day every time Johnsson/Davies/ Fox open their mouths! But they've decided to go with Brexit for a variety of reasons and I feel they no longer speak for me or my family/friends. Lib Dems seem to be talking a language I like though...

Jaws5, I couldn't agree more.

Mistigri, I've just done the same. But I'm not optimistic. And I'm sorry to say my LibDem MP told me he would not vote against article 50 if it came to it.

Lib Dems - yes, I had to hold my nose to rejoin, but felt that this issue was more important than harbouring grudges about past mistakes. Labour are indeed being absolutely pathetic - a wide open undefended Tory goal, and what do they do? Take the ball down to the opposite end and score own goal after own goal.

Campaigning in Witney on Saturday, Lib Dems were out in force, as were some Greens. Labour had a poxy little stall, with five people on it, and their main argument was about grammar schools. The Tories weren't anywhere to be seen, but that may have been because they were in Birmingham.

But LibDem activity does not always turn into votes - the silent Tories, who would vote for a stuffed dummy if it said Tory, come out, place their cross, and disappear into the woodwork again.