Westministenders. Boris worries about the land of his birth and simply wonders, what the hell next!?

[RedToothBrush]

Of all the Westministers intro I’ve done to date, I think this has been the hardest to write.

My first thought is where on earth to start, and then where to stop with how Trump’s victory affects us in the UK. It completely changes international relations. The political fall out is going to be considerable and potentially radioactive in its toxicity.

To hardened Brexiteers, America falling to Trump represents the domino effect in progress. It will embolden them. And the fear is that on 4th December both Italy and Austria could fall next as they respectively, face a referendum and a re-run of the presidential election.

And then there’s France…

All of this is a threat to the EU. It just leaves everyone, including the UK asking what next? And what of our relationship with the US? Who knows? It makes it look around and say, can we rely on the US, and without the US surely we have no choice but to grow closer to the EU. Perhaps there is a role for us in-between but there really are no guarantees and do we want to make that choice?

The suggestion is that May has no love for Trump. And whilst the hard right might harbour fantasies about becoming the 51st State, which seem to be led by Farage himself, this exposes the one red line that could bring the fury of the country down on the government to its extinction. The NHS. Its not for sale. Its not to be subject to a trade deal.

In a curious turn of events, rumours grow that the government will contend at the Supreme Court that a50 CAN be reversed afterall. Davis had personally been responsible for the original line that its not reversible. This was a political decision to tie us into leaving, and show intent and seriousness to Leavers. Yet it was always a crazy one that is not in the national interest.

Going back on this totally changes the game.

It would be a move that will go down well with Remainers and Liberal Leavers but will enrage the hardliners especially if the ECJ is part of this new tact.

It off loads a pile of risk and it is the prudent and sensible approach. It is much needed to protect the best interests of the country overall. Its also that magic ‘Get Out of Jail Free Card’ for that promised Nissan deal.

The change of tact would also help to appease MPs and much opposition to Brexit. And in doing so, also lessens the chances of a HoC rebellion against May and also reduces the chances of an early election, thus is perhaps a more stabilising way forward. It encourages negotiation of a good deal that other parties and rebels will also find agreeable rather than them feeling like they are being held to ransom on.

It would almost certainly delay things and might interfere with May’s precious timetable.

But there’s France… and the Presidential elections are in April/May

Do we really want to trigger article 50, if post Trump, the domino really is likely to fall there too and Le Pen wins the Presidency? There is suddenly a potential ally for major EU reform. Or even its collapse. Now is not the time to do something rash and drastic but to hold our nerve just a little longer.

It makes sense to everyone to hang fire and delay. If only briefly to see what now happens.

There are dangers in doing this though. The prospect of the ECJ being involved in a case which is in essence about our Constitution, is not only embarrassing but could be explosive. It will raise fears of leavers that Brexit will not happen. It will play to the extremes and the agenda of UKIP. It exposes judges to the press and criticism that they are activists and also trying to stop Brexit. Though Gove seems to have changed his tune and is defending them rather more than he was previously...

With tensions running high will Farage get his 100,000 march? Maybe, maybe not. Only time will tell on that one. He is trying to win through intimidation though, and that makes people fear him if we don’t do his bidding and what’s happening over in the States only emboldens him and makes others fear him more. He is divisive and never will be able to serve the national interest, because of it no matter how honest his delusions of being an ambassador to Trump are.

It just adds to the growing sense of helplessness and growing question of whether the proud tradition of British liberalism can even survive? It becomes appears to many this is ultimately the goal of Mr Farage – and not the EU. The EU is just a protector of it.

Well I don’t believe that Farage does have it all his way and has the monopoly on people power, nor a connection to the public that no one else has.

One of the themes developing on twitter, is one about passion, hope and a new sense of purpose. One to defend British values and not become like Trumpland. We have a warning and an example of how it really could be worse and it’s not a pretty sight.

I remember during the referendum one poster unsure of how to vote, asking simply:
“I don't want to spoil my vote. I want to vote, and vote with conviction”.

It was a question I found difficult to answer at the time. To me it highlighted how much people did want something to believe in and to not having that. We must start to build on that, and provide that alternative.

But I do believe those things to believe in were there all along. The NHS and our open democracy, whatever the flaws and imperfections of our institutions they have endured and survived for a reason – and not just for the benefit of the ‘elite’.

We just took them for granted, and now we are going to have to stand up and make sure people know that by speaking out, and know that while moderates might have it in their nature to compromise there are also some things we just can not loose in the process. We must not be drawn into a battle along violent lines as it will be used against those who do. We can’t loose our soul in trying to defend what is precious, nor should we try and reassure ourselves by finding justification for things that can not and should not be justified.

The Roman Emperor Marcus Aurelius wrote in notes to himself;

"The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane.”

I think that message rings true now both for Leave and Remain supporters alike. You might have made a decision on 23rd June but you still have other choices to make now.

Choose to stay sane.

If she wants to do that, then she needs to also be transparent about what she intends and to drop this bull shit about not showing our negogiting hand.

She can't have it both ways and protect the principle of democracy requiring proper parliamentary debate.

Effective negotiation requires extensive preparation in terms of what both you are seeking and what the other side will be likely to bring to the table together with quantification of all the likely benefits / impacts. Even if it is a business negotiation It is not holding set of poker cards under the table. The negotiators have to take their strategy to senior management / shareholders unless the constraints are already set out and then are held accountable for what they achieve. It focuses the mind on the greatest benefit to the business...

This is an infinitely more complex negotiation of political, economic and legal arangements that will have implications for the country that will last for decades . There is no mandate attached to any particular outcome other than an undefined "leave". In a democracy with checks and balances Theresa May should bring her negotiating strategy for debate to the sovereign body, and it should have the benefit of the input of the will of the representatives of the people, especially in the context that the "people " never had an opportunity to express any view on the complexities. She should also be held to account by that sovereign body for the detail of what she delivers before it commits the country to it's consequences.

It might all seem a bit messy and time consuming but the alternative is government by the executive like you have in China, which actually is very effective in terms of what it delivers, whether it is what the people want is another matter....

But RTB, the debate will come once there is something to debate surely?

From Guardian Live Feed:

Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, has given an interview to the Czech daily Hospodářské noviny. Politico Europe have taken a look, and their short write-up contains three good lines.

Johnson says the UK is probably leaving the customs union.

"[There will be a] dynamic trade relationship [between the UK and the EU] and we will take back control of our borders, but we remain an open and welcoming society … We probably will have to come out of the customs union, but that’s a question I am sure will be discussed."

Until now ministers have refused to say whether the UK will leave the customs union, although their language about the possibility of new trade deals suggests they assume the UK will leave. For example, last night in her speech to the Lord Mayor’s Banquet Theresa May said she imagined a world where “alongside the traditional trading blocs, agile nation states like Britain can trade freely with others according to what’s in their own best interests and those of their people”. If the UK remained in the customs union it would not be able to strike trade deals with other countries because it would have to implement the EU’s common external tariff.

He says the claim that free movement is one of the fundamental freedoms of the EU is “nonsense”. Politico reports:

"It is a “myth,” “nonsense” and “bollocks” to claim that freedom of movement is one of the fundamental freedoms of the European Union, British Foreign SecretaryBoris Johnson said in an interview published Tuesday."

Johnson told the Czech daily Hospodářské noviny that freedom of movement is not enshrined in the EU Treaties. “Everybody now has it in their head that every human being has some fundamental God-given right to move wherever they want. It’s not true. That was never the case. That was never a founding principle of the EU. Total myth,” he said.

He says Donald Trump is “in many aspects a liberal guy from New York”.

"There is every reason to be positive. Donald Trump is dealmaker, he is a guy who believes firmly in values that I believe in too — freedom and democracy. As far as I understand he is in many aspects a liberal guy from New York.

www.politico.eu/article/boris-johnson-free-movement-as-a-fundamental-freedom-bollocks-brexit-trump/
Original article here

But RTB, the debate will come once there is something to debate surely?

We should know what we want BEFORE we notify Europe. We should be in the midst of this process NOW.

This is why today's story about there being no plan is an issue, as behind the scenes the government don't have any level of agreement, yet are still pushing to a timetable that disadvantages us in the long run, if only in terms of planning for exit.

Plus its not for the government to decide alone on a matter of such importance and implications for the entire country.

Leavers have certain needs and expectations in this. Remainers also do too if only in terms of reassurance. Plus businesses need to plan.

None of this is being recognised.

This is why today's story about there being no plan is an issue,
So the 'bullet proof bill' is why this story was leaked.

As for Johnson and Turkey being fast tracked to join the EU a) it's one of the reasons people say they voted for Leave and b) if the UK is no longer in the EU it's none of our business anyway.

As for being and agile nation state being able to strike trade deals, I think TM and Johnson will wake up to find that the Empire is long gone, and we no longer have the clout that we did.

In ten years time, I expect the UK to have broken up and with it will go things like our permanent place on the Security Council. E & W will be part of a small island off the coast of W Europe.

RTB 'it's not for the government to decide alone' - but they are not deciding anything more than to trigger the start of negotiations.

What gets accepted along the way will of course be debated but in the first instance the government, who called the referendum with the agreement if parliament, now needs to let matters begin to run their course and the first step is to do as they promised and serve the a50.

whatwouldrondo your analogy falls down somewhat when you consider the possibility of the opposing negotiating team eavesdropping on all the internal strategy meetings as would be the case for everything discussed in Parliament.

DC didn't do so well in his grand renegotiating having set out his best and worst outcomes in advance. Not at all surprising when he came back with even less than his red line. I think in DC's case (and in the prospective negotiation) it made it far harder for the other side to bring their electorate on side because by being so open he had closed off many of the bluff options European politicians employ with their own side.

Bored, I despair. The economic impact of exiting the EU with no assurance on customs union or single market participation will be so huge that it is the duty of anyone responsible for triggering A50 to have a plan for achieving economic stability for the good of the country BEFORE the 2 year deadline is up. It is simply not good enough to take a "trigger and be damned" attitude. I can only assume that you are sitting on a huge pile of gold, because I am shit - scared for the future of my family.

As for Johnson and Turkey being fast tracked to join the EU...

Would that be Turkey, which is considering the reintroduction of the death penalty?

If so, that would surely preclude them from joining the EU.

But RTB, the debate will come once there is something to debate surely?
What gets accepted along the way will of course be debated

If the debate referred to is Parliamentary debate, the PM/cabinet seem to be doing all they can to avoid anything being debated or voted on by parliament.

Without being forced to by the Supreme Court it seems very unlikely that the Government will present any of the Brexit negotiations to Parliamentary debate, unless it becomes politically necessary for them to do so.

Bored, the trouble is that, the 2 year period is so short that most of what is needed to be done can not be done in that period - especially if we squander some of that precious time whilst we are still deciding what we actually want. May should never have set a date in March as it was never really achievable and now has set a deadline which, if it over runs will create problems in its own right.

We need to be ready to leave on the dot of the 2 years. So we need to work backwards from that and that includes the date of triggering a50.

I know it sounds like its all trying to stop it, but if we are going to do it, we still need to do it right.

howabout Firstly i made it clear this was much much more than even the most complex business negotiation, the analogy is very limited.

However whilst the other side may or may not eavesdrop on your internal discussions (and I have personal experience of them doing exactly that / or stealing papers / hiding cameras behind where you are sitting to get sight of your papers and what goes on after you or they have flounced out of the room) if they are skilled negotiators you know full well that they will have analysed your sources of power and every possible move you will make. You go into a major negotiation anticipating all that. Anybody who goes in thinking they hold any secrets is actually at an immediate disadvantage. For sure you play your cards but none of them are secret.

But this isn't a business anyway, it is a democracy, as are the other parties to the negotiation. Theresa May is pitching for rule by the executive, which is not democratic and is certainly not justified when making a decision which will have such a far reaching impact on people's lives for which she has nothing other than a vague mandate to leave. That mandate needs to be more closely defined by our representatives. Otherwise we have the Chinese model of government, one where they are never held accountable for the fact that their executive action always puts the interests of the rulers ahead of the will or the good of the people.

RTB I think there has to be a statement of intent. If the EU want us out we will be out pdq anyway. If not and there is a deal to be done then they should be accepting of an extension of time. But to get an I liking of the EUs position, we need to trigger the a50. Because, don't forget, Junker played a big part in where we are now by his refusal for ant scoping to be possible - if that had happened then maybe there would be something to discuss but as it is there is not.

Could someone who understands the parliamentary process please explain how a bill can be "bullet proof". From what I can see, it is always possible to amend a bill.

Is the government suggesting that the proposed bill is politically bulletproof? Does such a thing exist?

Terrible typing. On my phone on a commuter train
I liking = inkling
Ant scoping = any scoping

And it seem Johnson is doing a Fox

Law and policy @Lawandpolicy
Boris Johnson claims free movement was never fundamental to the EU treaties.

This is Article 3 of the Treaty of Rome 1957.

See Article 3c.

Article 3
For the purposes set out in Article 2, the activities of the Community shall include, as provided on this Treaty and in accordance with the timetable set out therein
a) the elimination, as between Member States, of customs duties and of quantitative restrictions on the import and export of goods, and of all other measures having equivalent effect;
b) the establishment of a common customs tariff and of a common commercial policy towards third countries;
c) the abolition, as between Member States, of obstacles to freedom of movement for persons, services and capital
d) the adoption of a common policy in the sphere of agriculture
e) the adoption of a common policy in the sphere of transport
f) the institution of a system ensuring that competition in the common market is not distorted
g) the application of procedures by which the economic policies of Member States can be co-ordinated and disequilibria on their balances of payments remedied
h) the approximation of the laws of Member States to the extent required for the proper functioning of the common market;
i) the creation of a European Social Fund in order to improve employment opportunies for workers and to contribute to the raising of their standard of living
j) the establishment of a European Investment Bank to facilitate the economic expansion of the Community by opening up fresh resources
k) the association of the overseas countries and territories in order to increase trade and to promote jointly economic and social development.

David Cameron's limiting issue in negotiation was not that they knew what position was, it was that he could not defend the reasonableness of it in the face of the principles at stake for the EU. The bogey of immigration had been created by him and the Conservative's strategy for staying in power, and the EU countries knew that, immigration was benefitting the UK economically and politicians and the tabloids were shifting the blame for other ills on to it.

The only way he could have won more would have been if he had had more power, but the actual power that lay dormant in the threat to leave was underestimated by all sides and even most leave politicians.

Bored someone has tabled an early day motion to get a vote about an eventual a50 vote, to do just that and have a formal statement of intent from MPs.

Has Boris never heard of Google, or this just another one of his games?

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/disability-benefit-test-dwp-stephen-crabb-traumatic-iain-duncan-smith-theresa-may-a7405206.html

More rebellion. This time from Stephen Crabb (who refused to take a job under May as it was a demotion).

Hey I have a name for Banks' corruption list:
Samuel Lowe ‏@SamuelMarcLowe
Tip for civil servants new to DIT looking to learn more about trade: under no circumstances should you read Liam Fox's book.

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/11/liam-fox-throws-book-civil-servants/
So, what are the current batch of civil servants getting up to? Well, over in the Department for International Trade, Mr S understands that reading is high on the agenda. Word reaches Steerpike that Liam Fox has instructed his civil servants to read Rising Tides:Facing the Challenges of a New Era — a book that aims to explain ‘how to meet the challenge of the new global reality’. And which bright spark is the author of thetome?A man by the name of… Liam Fox. Well, that’s one way to increase book sales.

Samuel Lowe ‏@SamuelMarcLowe
Although Rising Tides is apparently very popular in Azerbaijan, so what do I know.
www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/07/liam-fox-azerbaijan-relationship-book-publishing?0p19G=c

The register of MPs interests shows that the oil-rich dictatorship of Azerbaijan, via its London lobbyists, paid Dr Fox £5,700 for the right to translate Rising Tides into an Azerbaijani Turkish edition. The generosity of Azerbaijan’s rulers did not stop there. On 1 February 2015, the regime flew him and an aide to Istanbul to launch the book and put them up in a luxury hotel. The cost of the four-day trip was £3,579.94.

It wasn’t his first overseas promotion. The Azerbaijani press reported that Dr Fox was in Baku in September 2014, where he was received by no less a magnifico than President Ilham Aliyev, the son of President Heydar Aliyev, who seized power in 1993, after the collapse of the Soviet Union, and passed control of the state down through the family.

Samuel Lowe ‏@SamuelMarcLowe
As Secretary of State Liam Fox has visited the US, India, Switzerland, Bahrain, United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

In answer to question raised by Tim Farron 13th Sept (answered 10 Oct) in written questions to the DIT

Samuel Lowe @SamuelMarcLowe
Which leaves me feeling slightly more confident about my, admittedly slightly hasty, prediction:

Samuel Lowe @SamuelMarcLowe - 25 Jul 2016
After some some discussion. Predicted first post-Brexit tokenistic FTA partner: A gulf state.

Why? Ministers love being treated like kings.

Incidentally, I note here, that I think there is enough potential swing in his constituency to the Lib Dems for Mr Fox to be worried at the next GE. A good scandal pointed out by the Lib Dems certainly wouldn't harm that...

Grant Lewis @GrantLewis1
@SamuelMarcLowe I believe that a couple of those Gulf States have also purchased the rights to his great tome on trade too

Oooo how wonderful.

Do get your orders in quick. Amazon only have 7 in stock at £9.99 (though you can get yourself a second hand copy for 1p plus postage). Its much in demand.

Stephen Crabb - worried about losing his seat is he? I don't believe he's discovered a conscience.

Red that is a bit of selective quotation unfair to Boris and Liam. I think it is broadly accepted that Free Movement within the Treaty of Rome is envisaged as covering free movement in the pursuit of trade and at a stretch to work. It was not until Maastricht and beyond that Free Movement of people in and of itself became a thing and even then it is a stretch to call it a fundamental right as opposed to something which all other things being equal the EU would seek to remove restrictions on.

how, people exercise their right to FOM, in the vast number of cases, precisely in the pursuit of trade and to work.