Westministenders. Boris and co learn the basics - and limits - of British sovereignty and democracy.

[RedToothBrush]

There is a plan.

It is not a very good one, but May says she has a plan.

As May declared a revolution and set out her vision for a Britain ‘open’ for free trade and hard working people she managed to further drive in the wedge of division into a society which needed measured and sensitive handling.

Her speech was met, with much derision and horror both here and abroad. Even UKIP voices say the Conservatives went too far.

Brexit began to take shape. It appeared hard and fast. Without the consent of parliament. It was to be run by the executive alone. As the ex-Polish Foreign Minister points out, the shape of it decided because it was viewed as the ‘easiest’ option. Not the one in the best interests of the country. Leaving the EU has become indistinguishable to the Single Market. We are told by Mr Davis that there is no down side to this.

Then something else began to happen and the plan is beginning to not look so clever…

The pound plunged.

Mr Hammond, who has seemed to have resisted the urge to take the hallucinatory drugs being handed out in vast quantities around the Cabinet Table, came out saying that we must consider the economic reality of Brexit.

It was followed by a leaked paper that put the cost of Hard Brexit at between £38bn and £66bn a year. Our EU membership cost £8bn last year. Where are those NHS buses now?

The government response? Oh that was George. He just made it up for ‘Project Fear’. Or something to that effect.

The government on the one hand were saying how great Brexit will be, yet were not prepared to make the case in parliament. The Times editorial came out as categorically for the Single Market. Even the Sun on Sunday editorial spoke up for the Single Market (though was still in the land of cake wanting immigration control too).

David Davis took to the Commons to answer questions and was met with a chorus of rising alarm. Whilst he confirmed that the majority of EU citizens here do have their right to remain here as being their legal entitlement, it does not guarantee their rights under this. He echoed the language of the citizen of nowhere in May’s speech and, perhaps can be seen to make, the stark message that you should consider taking on British Citizenship.

Parliament has started to wake up to what is at stake. It is not just whether we stay in the EU or not, but Brexit presents a challenge to democratic processes and threatens to bypass the checks and balances to power that parliament is supposed to provide. It is a threat to our international reputation as a champion of liberal values and democratic stature. It is a threat to our economic security. It is a threat to our diplomatic relations, with the reckless comments and language coming from some. .

The stirrings of rebellion and a credible opposition come from a variety of quarters. From both leavers and remainers alike. From every party including the governments. Initially the government refused to give, so Labour announced an opposition debate on transparency of Brexit and it all started to fall apart. Faced with a vote they could not get enough support to win they made an apparent U-Turn and agreed to parliamentary scrutiny of the government’s position ahead of a50 within certain limits.

Keir Starmer, making the point that Human Rights Lawyers are not to be messed with, has written 170 questions, one for every day before the end of March when a50 is due to be triggered, for Davis to respond to.

However, the agreement to this debate on negotiations is none binding and there is no date for it as yet. The government must not be allowed to pay lip service to rebels. They must be held to this reversal.

Today’s opposition debate seems to suggest that the government definition of scrutiny is wheeling out David Davies and get him to waffle a lot and not say anything. This has gone down like a lead balloon. The government can not maintain this. Something will give. He has still refused to release a green or white paper which many expected.

May’s choice will be blunt. She either keeps pretending Santa is real and can deliver the pony whilst losing the house in the process or she owns up to the looming cold hard truth of reality.

May might be fully committed to taking us off the cliff top no matter what but she’s going to have to fight to get there.

In the best interests of the country the pressure must be kept up. There must be resistance to the ‘Little England’ mentality and orders by the Mail and the Express to silence those unpatriotic ‘agents of Brussels’ who are raising legitimate concerns that need to be considered as part of the process.

Its either this or we will have to rely on the proposed new Royal Yacht to send Kate off round the world begging for trade deals “to once again project the prestige of this nation across the globe” as Mr Gove says. Prestige we still had before the referendum was announced.

Yesterday’s Opposition Debate on the Rights of EU nationals
hansard.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-10-19/debates/F1337420-EBD9-413C-949B-A4AEA0832B2C/RightsOfEUNationals
Full debate here

There was a vote on the debate with the government defeating it. There were two tory rebels: Zac Goldsmith and his neighbour Tania Mathias. (UKIP’s Carswell is also notable in his complete absence).

In other news:
Open Britain, the campaign to keep the UK in the single market, says 27,000 people have already backed its campaign calling on Theresa May to guarantee the right of EU nationals to stay in the UK after Brexit. It is calling the campaign #WriteToRemain and it has set up a website to enable people to submit letters to the prime minister about this.

Brexit Timetable
press.labour.org.uk/post/152060227774/labour-push-for-government-timetable-and-vote-on
Labour push for government timetable and vote on Brexit plans - Keir Starmer

Keir Starmer has written to Davis. Extract as follows:
“I am writing to you today to urge you to outline the Government’s intended timetable for publishing its basic plans for Brexit.

“Since the House of Commons will need time properly to scrutinise the plans and, no doubt, the House of Commons Brexit Select Committee along with the devolved administrations will want to do the same, I assume the plans will be made available no later than January 2017. Could you confirm that this will be the case or specify another date upon which the Government proposes to publish its plans.

“…I can [also] confirm that Labour will be pressing for a vote in Government time in the House of Commons on its plans for exiting the EU. Time for a vote and full debate therefore also needs to be built into the Government’s timetable; our economy, businesses and jobs depend upon it.”

High Skilled Migration
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/19/philip-hammond-attempts-to-ease-concerns-over-hard-brexit
Philip Hammond attempts to ease concerns over hard Brexit
Chancellor uses Treasury select committee to announce support for immigration system that accepts need for foreign high-skilled workers

www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37705852
Skilled workers 'may be exempt from immigration controls': Hammond
The chancellor has indicated that highly skilled workers may be exempt from the government's planned immigration controls.

Philip Hammond said he could not see why firms should be restricted from recruiting "high level" workers.

The public was not concerned about controls on "computer programmers, brain surgeons, bankers", he said.

The chancellor said voters wanted restrictions on those migrants competing for "entry level jobs".

"I cannot conceive of any circumstances in which we would be using those migration controls to prevent banks, companies moving highly qualified, highly skilled people between different parts of their businesses," he said.

Giving evidence to MPs on the Treasury Select Committee, Mr Hammond did not dispel suggestions that he supported students being taken out of the target for reducing net migration.

There is a problem here, as pointed out
Jonathan Portes ‏@jdportes
You can't "exempt" skilled workers from controls. Best you can do is create new bureaucracy to give some visas..

2nd Referendum
www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/20/theresa-may-to-tell-eus-other-leaders-there-will-be-no-second-referendum
Theresa May to tell EU's other leaders 'there will be no second referendum'

Nothing new here. But why after 4months is she still having to say this?

Obviously it’s to tell the EU but the mere fact she’s still stressing the point makes you wonder if the case for a 2nd Ref on a deal is still very compelling and inescapable in merit.

Democracy deficit
waitingfortax.com/2016/10/20/a-whine-made-from-sour-grapes/
A WHINE MADE FROM SOUR GRAPES
Another wonderful Blog from Jo Maugham QC on the democratic deficit and the need to address it

It has, and will be, said, and often, that the challenge is about thwarting the will of the people. That’s an expedient line to take but it does suffer from this deficiency: it’s just not true.

Here’s what David Pannick QC, who argued the case, for the lead claimant said:

If we are correct in our legal submissions, and if the government were then to place a bill before Parliament, it would be entirely a matter for Parliament whether to enact legislation and in what terms. Parliament may decide to approve such a bill, authorising notification. Parliament may reject such a bill, or it may approve it with amendments which may impose limits on the powers of the defendant. For example, as to the date of notification; for example, in relation to parliamentary approval of negotiating terms; for example, as to the need for the minister to report back to Parliament at defined times. All of those would be matters for Parliament to consider and decide.

There is (and I think, rightly) little or no enthusiasm in Parliament for rejecting a Bill authorising the triggering of Article 50. But there is for imposing conditions.

If the Claimants succeed then the Government will need to put before Parliament an Article 50 Notification Bill. And Parliament will have the opportunity to impose one or more conditions on the triggering of Article 50. And the one condition it should impose is the one that addresses that deficit.

If not offered by the Government in the Bill, Parliament should table and uphold amendments. Those amendments should require that there is put before the people or Parliament a sharp and focused choice. ‘Here is the deal that we have negotiated. It is what we, your Government, think reflects the will of the people in voting to Leave. It delivers an exit from the EU in a way that balances the hopes and wishes of all the citizens of the United Kingdom. But the choice is yours. Take this or stick with what we have as members of the EU.’

Other stuff in general
www.politico.eu/article/why-we-lost-the-brexit-vote-former-uk-prime-minister-david-cameron/
Why we lost the Brexit vote by Cameron Aide.

This has had a lot of attention today and positive reviews.

C4’s Gary Gibbon makes the observation on his blog on the C4 news website that
The old adage that they (the 27) read our papers but we don’t read theirs seems to echo, perhaps today as much as ever.

Its true, we don’t read much about what the reaction is to Brexit outside the UK.
Wales Online have an article on the very subject:
www.walesonline.co.uk/news/politics/what-rest-world-saying-brexit-12043752

Lord’s Scrutiny Report
And finally the Lords has published its Brexit scrutiny report:
www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/eu-select-committee-/news-parliament-2015/brexit-parliament-scrutiny-report-published/
The House of Lords EU Committee publishes its report urging that Parliament should be actively involved in scrutinising the forthcoming negotiations on Brexit as they happen – rather than after decisions have been taken, as proposed by the Government.

I’ll try and have a look through this and see if there is anything in the detail that is interesting.

And merry your point about the changes being irreversible is not necessarily correct; reversibility is a point in question. Do keep up, Red posted about it recently.

www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/19/why-its-time-for-a-new-campaign-for-brexit/
Why it's time for a new campaign for Brexit

There is no such thing as permanent victory in politics. History never ends: triumphs are fleeting; majorities can turn into minorities; and orthodoxies are inevitably built on foundations of sand. Communism was supposed to be discredited forever after the collapse of the Berlin Wall; yet many young people in Britain and America now call themselves socialists.

Progress is never guaranteed in politics: there are just ups and downs and swings of the pendulum.

One for you Bored.
Go and campaign and make the case for Brexit and what you want it to look like.
Simples.

Red that is my point exactly, that Remain are creating a 'hard opposition', if I can put it like that, they are perceived as attempting to thwart the will of the majority and thus in danger of causing an uprising.

Tiggy. Do you think that Conservatives could (would?) pledge in a manifesto that they would not allow Scotland to hold another independence referendum?

Britain Elects @britainelects
Britain should prioritise...
Access to the single market: 45%
Control over immigration: 39%
[Both]: 7%
(via Ipsos Mori / 14 - 17 Oct)

Either the Calais Refugees are children and the border agency are doing their job just fine OR the border agency are incompetent and not fit for purpose. Which option do you prefer in the context of Brexit?

Otto English ‏@Otto_English
If grown men have managed to get through to UK pretending to be teens that highlights flaw in Borders Agency's ability to process applicants

ROFLMAO!
But Visas.
Australian Style Points System.
Outside Customs Area.
Outside the Single Market.

I know, Blue Passports.
Solves everything.

Yep. Good plan.

Perhaps we gaze across the pond at Trump, who is threatening to deny the outcome of the vote. Read the comments on the threat of unrest.

Red that is my point exactly, that Remain are creating a 'hard opposition', if I can put it like that, they are perceived as attempting to thwart the will of the majority and thus in danger of causing an uprising

A tiny majority. Meanwhile Brexiteers are attempting to thwart the will of half the population. You notice Remainers don't threaten violence to get their way? No-one seems concerned that Remainers might riot - primarily presumably because they're generally better educated.

Just poking my head above the parapet to say I'm also an avid reader of these thread but seldom post as nothing to add. I'd imagine there are a lot of us (I've certainly sent a few people this way).

It's the most balanced and non hysterical discussion I have been able to find, and I am so grateful to Red for taking the time to post relevant links and updates. Honestly agree that this should be your career!

Also just to add that I'm another remainer that could have been swayed if there had been any indication that the government was competent enough to make the best Brexit possible and not send country down the pan. Nothing has convinced me of this yet but I'm ever hopeful!

Its true, we don’t read much about what the reaction is to Brexit outside the UK.

Because - in general - it's not really that hot a topic. Certainly not to the point of obsession. It's a small hint as to how important - or otherwise - the UK is to the EU. Let alone the rest of the world. And - sorry to piss on the dreams of Empire - other countries are hardly quaking in their shoes.

I wonder if T. May had an Iron Duke moment when she saw the list of MPs she had to choose ministers from:

I can only hope our enemies tremble as much when they see that list as I do

?

they are perceived as attempting to thwart the will of the majority and thus in danger of causing an uprising.

Or pointing out the many flaws and/or lies in the Leave campaigns which mean that the land of unicorns and cake portrayed by so many high profile Leave campaigners has had to be rowed back very quickly.

What exactly do you propose to do about Gibraltar, for example?

Are you addressing me personally, TBS? If so I can truthfully advise that I am proposing to personally do absolutely bugger all about Gibraltar, since I am not appointed to, but do I propose to leave those who are, to do so.

And TBS, the Leave campaign? Move on. We've had the vote.

Bored, if the danger was of an uprising then THAT should have been accepted as risk of the referendum AND WE NEVER SHOULD HAVE HAD IT IN THE FIRST PLACE.

This was something that was foreseeable - and yet even this compelling reason not to have a referendum was ignored thus endangering our country.

Yep, we could have an uprising. However I see three possible routes to one. Not just because Leavers don't get their own way by stamping their feet and shouting 'democracy'. It also could be against democracy being curtailed or it could be against Brexit being an utter disaster.

What you sound suspiciously like you just did was threaten violence if you don't get your own way though. I hope I'm wrong in that assessment.

Let me remind you this is a democracy.

We have a democratic and legal right to challenge. Violence on the other hand, is not legal.

As it stands the government's responsibility is one of two things:

Either reassure Remainers so they do not have to point out the fucknuggetry its coming out with.

or
Admit they have a point and say to Leavers that we need to address these issues unfortunately as they are in the national interest to do so.

You do not just plow ahead with a strategy that is flawed because people want it. Otherwise you might end up with a situation where Brexit is so bad, you end up with uprisings from Leavers AND Remainers alike.

That's not in the national interest. You act as grow ups and you reassure people and calm them down. You don't threaten them with violence. You come up with a proper plan rather than lipservice and ideological crap.

You do not inflame the situation by saying that the law courts are 'subverting democracy'.

Democracy is more than a vote - it is also the institutions that act to hold government to account and preserve the right to challenge government. If you don't understand that, you do not understand democracy. And if you are suggesting that democracy is something different, then you are threatening democracy. That is something that both remainers and leavers will resist as that goes beyond Brexit.

I hope that helps, you to understand the situation better rather than telling me an incorrect assessment of the situation and description of what democracy is.

Ah, ok then.

No-one seems concerned that Remainers might riot - primarily presumably because they're generally better educated.

Had the majority vote been to Remain but was then overruled in favour of Leaving, I think there might well be concerns about rioting Remainers too.

Perhaps in truth the difference in levels of concern regarding rioting Remainers and rioting Leavers has more to do with wearing the other shoe and very little to do with how wonderfully educated Remainers are

I agree the referendum was rashly drawn up and entered into. I do realise we are a democracy thank you. But then I stopped engaging because it's a bit of a hysterical rant. Perhaps substitute all those 'you'd for one's, huh?

Tiggy - it is an interesting question. In particular the membership of the EU for Scotland in its own right. My Belgian friends believe there are no obstacles to Scotland remaining in the EU, it is all propaganda in the British press. I don't know whether it can be resolved or not but I do believe an independent Scotland happy to abide by the 4 freedoms will have an easier ride in any negotiations with Europe - whether that means full membership of the EU or EFTA or whatever, and if the alternative is remaining in the UK with no free trade etc, it certainly seems to me to be worth thinking about.

But given the whole point of Brexit for Brexiteers is to keep Johnny foreigner out of little England, it would be inconceivable that a border could be shared with a Scotland in the EU. Which is why the Northern Irish issue is so problematic.

Irrespective of whatever Brexit does, or does not mean, it will have to factor in a land border (which has never been successfully policed) with a country which is an EU member. Moreover a country which is an EU member which is probably less well-disposed to the UK than it may have been in the past.

The whole thing is an unholy mess, and just hammers home - again, and again, and again - why the referendum; at least as executed, was such a stupid idea

Bored so "the people"'s wish for impossible, destructive things should be absolutely respected. But they shouldn't have to lift a finger to do it or give it a second thought?

Bored, I think you've made your point.

You have no interest and no understanding of Brexit. Now we all have that established, I suggest we all just move on and those of us who do wish to discuss it and do have concerns will just get on with that so you don't have to bother yourself about it.

We've got through probably 20 odd threads so far.

You aren't going to make a couple of posts and end that by shouting democracy.

I'm done with that type of conversation. If you want to contribute you are more than welcome, otherwise I think you've probably exhausted your argument.

Beautifully, beautifully put by the way Red. I agree 100%.