Westministenders. Boris, May and Judgement Day

[RedToothBrush]

Well its finally here. The day America changes forever. Good luck planet earth.

Our day of reckoning is beckoning too.

Tuesday is Supreme Court Judgement Day.

At 9.30 Lord Nueberger and the other ten justices will convene and he will read out their judgement.

Contrary to some suggestions this does not mean the decision is necessarily unanimous. It is normal for the Supreme Court to do this.

Nueberger will read any disagreements out as part of the judgment.
Their ruling will be far reaching in its importance however it goes.

A victory for the government will mean a50 can be triggered as and when Theresa May likes. That could be Tuesday afternoon in theory.

If it’s a victory for the claimants then things get much more complicated. It depends on how far the justices go.

It could rule that parliament need to vote on a50.

It could rule that the Great Repeal Act must be passed before a50 can be invoked.

It could rule that the Scottish and NI Assemblies must agree to a50 being invoked.

It could rule that the Good Friday Agreement must be resolved before a50 can be invoked.

It could rule that issues over acquired rights must be resolved before invoking a50.

It could draw other conclusions that we have not thought of.

A strong victory for the claimants could seriously hamper May’s plans for Brexit. Which is exactly why she has laid out her vision and has prepared the battle lines ready for her next round of blame laying.

None of this will be because the government has been short sighted.

If there is a strong victory, remember that May could have avoided the situation by accepting the High Court’s ruling in December that she needed Parliament’s consent to trigger a50. Anything more that makes triggering a50 more difficult is her sole responsibility and she had the power to avoid. Much of the right wing press will tell you differently.

We've heard so much about Hard Brexit and Soft Brexit. We should also talk of Democratic and Undemocratic Brexit. How Brexit is managed and how we conduct ourselves is arguably as important to the future as economics. It is right to oppose Undemocratic Brexit. It is important to make that distinction and all the principles that fall under that concept. What opposition there is need to get their shit together on this principle. Using patriotism to stifle this wholly wrong and unhealthy. Saying Brexit must happen no matter what, regardless of how bad it is and regardless of the cost is wrong.

Make the case for democracy. Keep talking about it. Talk about where it is failing and what we must do to strengthen it, not undermine it.

Here lies Labour's policy on Brexit. "We support Democratic Brexit which is the will of the people. This is how we define this. This is what is needed economic and socially." You can find the necessary slogans from this and start defining it outward from that. So far they have failed to capture this sentiment concisely into a soundbite that people can start to develop and push a left wing liberal agenda on their own terms from. Their PR is shocking and they are incoherent. May owned Corbyn at PMQ earlier this week on these grounds. This is not because they have been misrepresented by the press or been the victim of biased media. Its because they have been shit and have failed to set their own agenda and instead are dancing to everyone else's.

Here’s hoping that democracy will win through the challenges of the next few years. Democracy is about elections and referendums, but it is also so much more. It is about on going debate and the freedom of this debate, freedom of the press, a range of political parties and points of view, the independent judiciary, the right to oppose the state, freedom to exercise your legal rights, freedom of speech, an understanding of equality and an understanding and above all else - respect for of all of the above. It does not bode well that much of the right wing press and right wing politicians are telling us differently.

So much hope about our futures now rests with Angela Merkel one way or another.

Meanwhile Corbyn could face a major rebellion over a50 if he pursues a three line whip rather than a free vote. 60 - 80 Labour MPs are threatening not to tow the party line with shadow cabinet resignations potentially also on the cards.

Brace yourselves the roller coaster is just about to hit a one big drop.

... and voting Lib/Dem rather than Labour in Copeland hands the constituency to the Conservatives - even if I were a Lib/Dem Remainer I would struggle to see the logic in doing that?

I've always assumed that we'd have to start again from scratch but is that correct?

Isn't this the sort of detail that we have to thrash out?

I don't think any party can look to its vote in 2015 to predict what will happen now - the Referendum has changed that, and a shift is going on, (as Red has already pointed out.) How it will settle is anyone's guess at present.

Those trade deals are with the EU, so if the UK leaves, they no longer apply to the UK, just the rUK / E27
The EU has no say in that, other than to allow the UK to remain in the EU for longer than 2 years.

The trade with non-EU countries was not included in the 44% of UK exports that are to the EU.
Losing these trade agreements with non-EU countries was one of the problems those treacherous Remainers were trying to point out.

The UK is basically back to Year Zero wrt immediate agreements.
It will first have to agree WTO schedules with all member countries (all countries in the world except N Korea).
Any country with a grudge can obstruct this to some extent, e.g. Argentina, maybe ex- colonies like Kenya, Zimbabwe or countries that want something back, like India wanting more visas or China wanting to own more strategic industries.
Also, the WTO hardly tackles service exports at all - which are 80% of UK exports.

So, longterm, new trade deals with non-EU countries must be negotiated and the UK with 65 million does not have the clout of a 500 million EU, the world's largest trade bloc. Hence, other countries may not give the UK the same good deals the EU had.
That's apart from having the UK having great urgency for deals - always a bad negotiating position. Trade deals typically take 5-10 years.

In fairness, the EU in future will be the #2 trade bloc behind the US.
However, that's not such a big change as for the UK. The EU won't have the time pressure for new deals, because they already have the EU market and their existing deals with many other countries.

howabout, I would see Copeland slightly differently to be honest.

Labour's majority there is so slim that I they will lose the by-election on apathy and stay at home Labour voters alone rather than significant defection to the LDs.

In addition to that I don't think the LD portion of the vote would be enough to prop up Labour in order to win. The LDs would have had to completely stand their candidate down make this a possibly. And the Greens too.

This is also why Corbyn is also probably pissed. Not that he's given any reason for the LDs to have done this, having insisted on standing a pointless candidate in Richmond Park where they ended up loosing their deposit (and somehow managing to get less votes than they have Labour Party members in the constituency!)

It just goes to show that co-operation with other opposition parties rather than the government isn't something he should have dismissed so readily.

The LDs and Greens are in a position where they do need to stand because otherwise Remainers would have no opportunity for a voice at all. They also can't make the case to stand down for a democratic / soft Brexit / left wing liberal agenda / worker rights agenda because of Labour's position on a50 and unqualified support for the government.

At some point in politics you need to realise that political alliances have their place if you are in a position like the Labour Party currently are with the number of seats they have. Cooperation over and above political purity is more likely to assist you achieving your goals.

To my mind the seat is a lost cause to Labour anyway, so voting LD wouldn't make a difference. You might as well vote it on principle. If only to help them retain their deposit and make a point and increase LD presence locally (They got 3.5% in 2015). Unlike in Richmond Park though I do expect the LD to keep their deposit and increase their vote share, but not by a huge amount.

Kevin Schofield ‏****@PolhomeEditor

@ShippersUnbound @benrileysmith I even heard some claiming a 2,000-vote loss for Labour in Copeland would be a "statistical tie"!

^Tim Shipman ‏****@ShippersUnbound
@PolhomeEditor @benrileysmith now THAT's top spinning^

alexmassie ‏**@alexmassie**
@ShippersUnbound @PolhomeEditor @benrileysmith If Labour get any votes, that's got to count as a moral victory...

Kevin Schofield ‏****@PolhomeEditor

@alexmassie @ShippersUnbound @benrileysmith Every one a vote for socialism.

OUCH

(Strangely a 2000 vote difference is about the same as 40% Con to 33% Lab by my estimation based on a turnout of about 45%. I think the LDs likely to get about 2000 votes, and the greens somewhere in the region of 700. So you can see my logic about the LD vote not being quite sufficient to prop up Labour unless they stood down completely and they would need the Green vote too).

As I say, I could be wildly off here, but my guestimates seem to be tying in with the Telegraph rumour quite neatly at this stage.

Late to thread so this may have already been answered.

Apparently Corbyn did have a candidate he was pushing for Copeland but she was defeated. I think Conservative Press Office assumed she was the one selected.

At the moment I think Copeland is hard to predict - their candidate was pro -Remain so could appeal to the Lib Dem vote. Ex GP could appeal to NHS supporters. This is the bit Labour needs to push, because this is where the Tories are weak.

The Conservative Press office would probably say that regardless HPFA.

Peregina, I do think its hard to predict. There is plenty that could happen between now and 23 Feb, not least Tuesday's ruling.

The reason I made a prediction in the first place is more to see how close to guessing you can get. Even if I'm wildly out, I don't think that's a bad thing. It just shows how unpredictable by-elections are.

I am at least pleased because those reports seems to suggest that other people's thinking is at least in line with mine at this stage.

(And because if I'd have bet on politics in the last year I probably would have been ahead of the bookies, but since I don't like gambling for money I thought it fun to bet with myself for pride alone, credibility be damned).

I totally agree Labour needs to ally with other parties to be effective.
However, they have always resisted this, particularly Corbyn's purist wing of the party (unless it's Sinn Fein, TUSC, WRP etc). They still support fptp too.

The problem is: any political alliance needs to have at least some common principles other than "Tories baaaad" and the main issue to agree on atm is Brexit - voters would reject even the loosest alliance that can't agree on a common direction there.

The LibDems and the Greens have long and principled policies of being internationalist and pro-EU, whereas Labour seem to have ditched their longterm principles to pander shamelessly to the hardcore portion of the Brexit and anti-immigrant vote.

Labour strategy is baffling, not merely unprincipled:
65% of Labour's 2015 voters chose Remain, but Labour choose to concentrate on 35% of their own vote and ignore 48% of the total vote. Plus those Leavers who favour a "soft" Brexit compromise.

The Leave vote in Labour constituencies came partly from people who don't vote Labour anyway in GEs - Tories, UKIP, BNP, protest vote, habitual non-voters. Leave united them in a binary referendum, but are highly unlikely to unite them around UKIP in a GE.

Yes, Labour in Copeland rejected Corbyn's choice (pro-leave, only joined the Labour party in 2015, ffs !)
The chosen candidate looks as strong as they could wish for: well-respected locally, pro-nhs GP, pro-Remain, pro-nuclear industry.
Also, not being associated with Corbyn is probaly an advantage with any electorate that isn't just the Labour Party

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/20/jeremy-corbyn-labour-copeland-byelection-gillian-troughton

However, is all that enough to counter the national disintegration of Labour support ?

The Leave vote in Labour constituencies came partly from people who don't vote Labour anyway in GEs - Tories, UKIP, BNP, protest vote, habitual non-voters. Leave united them in a binary referendum, but are highly unlikely to unite them around UKIP in a GE.

Yes, quite. So why are they listening to Farage's noise about mopping up the Labour vote? Labour do need to get back in touch with their constituents though and start stressing the good things done under the last Labour government.

Oh FUCK !
Gerry Adams:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/jan/21/northern-irelands-eu-exit-will-destroy-peace-deal-says-gerry-adams

"“The British government’s intention to take the north out of the EU, despite the wish of the people there to remain [56%], is a hostile action"

“Not just because of the implications of a hard border on this island but also because of its negative impact on the Good Friday agreement."

“The British prime minister repeated her intention to bring an end to the jurisdiction of the European court"

Along with her commitment to remove Britain from the European convention on human rights
this stand threatens to undermine the fundamental human rights elements of the Good Friday agreement.”

Really interesting to see your thinking on Copeland Red as it is so different from mine. Labour have a majority to lose so to my thinking every vote for Green / Lib Dem cuts in to this. I think UKIP is harder to predict because a fair few will go Conservative because they are happy with TM so far and the 30%+ of the Labour vote who are Brexit may vote UKIP in disgust at the PLP vacillations. You are probably right to assume a Conservative victory but not because Labour is not Remain enough imo.

BigChoc worth bearing in mind that 70% of all Labour constituencies voted Brexit and many Labour voters are UKIP minded on other issues in these constituencies. In contrast in the 30% Remain constituencies (inner city constituencies esp in London) the threat is from the Conservatives and both Conservative and Labour Remainers here are most likely to vote Lib / Dem over Brexit and cancel each other out. There are a few Conservative / Lib marginals in London and if like Richmond they went Lib/Dem over Brexit this helps Labour by reducing the Conservative majority. This was the strategy of attacking the Lib / Dems which won the Conservatives the GE.

I also never bet for money but so far called the Scottish Ref, the GE, Brexit, the Scottish elections and Trump. Difficult not to be obsessed with such matters what with NS permanently threatening Indyref2 and trying to understand the tactical idiosyncrasies of Scottish PR.

You don't have to be pro or anti EU to be in favour of the NHS and workers rights.

The Greens and Lib Dems are in favour of both.

Its almost an anti-middle class agenda that Labour seem to be taking. Yes the Labour party are supposed to be the party of the working class and that's what they want to get back to, but this is a) being led by Jeremy fucking Corbyn b) be the brain child of middle class people desperate to prove they are working class.

Yet Labour has a significant proportion of its current supporters who are middle class (even if they are in denial about it) and this kind of attitude does a huge disservice to an awful lot of working class people who are frankly better than these awful stereotypes and are more intelligent than that even if they don't have the benefit of a higher level of education.

That's not what working class nor middle class people want.

I think they want to be listened to better and be represented better really, by people who have a degree of credibility and integrity. They don't want or expect ideological purity as most people are more realistic and pragmatic about things (or at least they were before Brexit).

That's simply grass roots stuff, not coping UKIP. If Labour come out of Stoke and Copeland alive it will be because of this grass roots stuff and not because of the leadership of the party, the party strategy or the party's policies (if only because no one has a fucking clue what they stand for at the moment).

Corbyn's appeal as having integrity is in complete tatters. He has no moral authority. His leadership is still a car crash.

Just about every 2015 Corbynites I know, are just shaking their heads in utter disbelief at the moment. And switching to the Lib Dems with a peg on their nose.

And its not just over Brexit.

You are probably right to assume a Conservative victory but not because Labour is not Remain enough imo.

I'm not saying Labour 'not being Remain enough' is why I think the Conservatives will win. I don't think Brexit is their fundamental problem in Copeland. Its nuclear power (and trident) and Corbyn himself.

I think Brexit perhaps tips the scales for those who were remainers (which is likely to be lower percentage than in other parts of the country) but this merely forms part of the perfect storm about why they won't turnout for Labour. Some of them will go elsewhere, but for the most part this isn't the driving force.

Its apathy, rather than a preference for another party that's the issue.

HowAbout The referendum was a once-only nonparty binary choice.
That 70% of constituencies included only 35% of Labour voters and included many who will never vote Labour in a GE - Tories, Kippers, BNP all the Leaves from all parties.

Pandering to Leave is concentrating on 35% of 52%

Problem with that logic Red is that the Lib/Dems were in government when the Cameron / Osborne austerity project started. In fact an austerity government could not have been formed without them. Doesn't give them many points for credibility or integrity in my book.

Contrast their "moderating influence" with the real policy differences in Scotland under the SNP even within the limitations of devolution - and I say that as an anti-Scottish Independence voter.

I agree that apathy will be one issue in Copeland for Labour, but what of May's position on farming? What reassurances has she given? Not that her reassurances are actually worth anything.

35% in the particular case of Labour trying to shore up its vote, I mean
The 66% of Tory voters who are Leavers are not Labour voters.
The 65% Labour Remainers are

That 70% of constituencies included only 35% of Labour voters and included many who will never vote Labour in a GE - Tories, Kippers, BNP all the Leaves from all parties.

Many of these won't vote at all. DS has a friend with his own business in Witney. He voted Leave. How did he vote in the by election? Not at all; he doesn't vote. A recession could easily send his business down the pan. Will he make the connection to Brexit, if that is the cause? I doubt it.

A bit of sums for fun because I am still having trouble getting my head round the "Labour should be Remain" thinking based on Copeland.

Brexit vote 70% turnout and 24k leave and 14k remain

GE 2015 63% turnout and Lab 17k, Con 14k, UKIP 6k, LibDem 1k, Green 1k.

Assume all UKIP are leave and all Green/LibDem are remain. Assume Conservatives are UK average leave at 60%

Sorry computer posted too soon. Gives Leave at 14k (8 Con and 6 UKIP) and Remain at 8k(6 Con and 2 LDG) before considering Labour and differential turnout. That suggests max of 6k Labour Remain and 11k Leave (even if you assume all differential turnout was Leave).

Labour voters may be split nationally at 35% Leave versus 65% Remain but the Leave voters and the Remain voters are concentrated in different constituencies.

Where did 'Labour should be Remain' come from? Was this just Copeland, or the Labour party nationally?

We don't know if the Labour & Tory / Leave & Remain share is split identically over the country. Probably not, but how wide are the variations ?
Do we have constituency breakdowns of what % Leave or Remain fir the main parties ?
Maybe Labour have constituency polls ?
I'm sure Ashcroft & co do.

However, I find this electoral calculation very cynical when it is the motivation for reversing decades of party policy.
Not the idealism that would attact young Remainers, or even young left Leavers
I expect a nationalist, immigrant-bashing party with leftwing economic policies could do well.
But isn't that basically the French Front National ? And half of Ukip ?