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.

At the moment.

All countries need to be in a trading bloc to survive economically in the 21st century
It's just that the Tory right (and many Tory voters) have always wanted to be in the US bloc and regard the EU bloc as foreign / ancient enemies
(I don't know if school covers UK wars with the US ?)
So now May plans to swap blocs.

Looked at purely economically, becoming the 51st state - or joining the US Commonwealth, like Puerto Rico - may be a lot safer than just an FTA after Brexit.
Because anything less than that can easily be undone by the next Democratic President - who may be quite angry with the UK.

We've seen Trump intends to pull out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.
Any UK US trade deal could be ended similarly by the Democrats.

A few days ago people were saying: don't normalise it. That's what happened in the 1930s. And May is disgracing us with her visit and ukip trade deals.

Yet people get cross when we mention the 1930s. I suspect that they know we are in danger of going down the slippery slope, but they would rather not think about it.

It's not just that they want to be in the US bloc they want to emulate aspects of the US economy. Privatise the NHS, shrink welfare, support big business above all etc.

Hammond referenced that in his threats in Die Welt. We're closer to the US model than the rest of Europe.

Problem is for all their obsession with US trade, we don't have much that the US want to buy.

"51st State is what I am expecting."
What would the US stand to gain by absorbing us? we have not much left to offer now that we are exiting the EU. A bilateral agreement with the US is going to leave us............ absolutely fucked. Rather than a partnership of equals, the US will have the upper hand in any trade agreement and exploit this beautiful country and no one will be able to stop it. Dystopia. Wondering what Queen Liz / future eKing Charlie make of all this?

*King not sure where the e came from [cofnused]

^Tory donor predicts Theresa May will have to quit within two years
Businessman Charlie Mullins, who helped fund article 50 legal challenge, believes fallout from Brexit talks will force PM out^
www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/23/tory-donor-charlie-mullins-predicts-theresa-may-quit-within-two-years-brexit
Charlie Mullins

My God TM is going to meet the Orange One and will discuss trade deals and now we are going to become the 51st State! The UK and US are fascist states and all leavers only want to deal with 'white' countries. You really have very vivid imaginations you lot! and sure can work yourselves up into a frenzy.
I certainly wouldn't want trade deals with any country that gave it's citizens increased rights to come here or us to go there. That was the whole point of Brexit, I want, and all the other leavers I know on these boards and my friends just want an even playing field for everyone coming to the UK no matter where in the world they are from. Through the EU we have trade deals with other parts of the world. Do these other countries have special visa/immigration arrangements with us as a result? I don't think so, so why on earth would we start doing deals like that now?

What would the US have to gain from the UK being the 51st State - nothing much, but what do they gain from States like Hawaii?

On a completely separate subject
Huffington Post says that the Tories have written off Stoke Central. This may well be a mistake. Personally I thought that their cynical stance in Richmond Park probably worked to their disadvantage - it was obvious that Zak Goldsmith was not Independent, so the electorate were treated as though they were fools. Which doesn't go down well.

The New York Times ‏*@nytimes* 8m
Several Republican senators have proposed a bill that would give states the option to keep the Affordable Care Act

I certainly wouldn't want trade deals with any country that gave it's citizens increased rights to come here or us to go there.

Well that's deals with Canada, India, Australia and the USA ruled out then. We should manage one with Jamaica though.

Through the EU we have trade deals with other parts of the world. Do these other countries have special visa/immigration arrangements with us as a result

The Canada deal does, the India/EU trade deal failed because they wanted too much access to the UK labour market.

As much as anything given Trump's narcissist tendancies absorbing the UK in some way has an ego based thing given the history of the two countries. This is a country who celebrate their independence from the UK. What could be better to now be the master of the country that gave birth to their own?

Its a diplomatic and symbolic alliance too. What message does effectively 'taking over' the UK that once Great Empire send to the EU or the rest of the world? It says, do what we say.

I don't expect it to be a formal 51st. More of a looser association merely to keep the pretence to sections of the British that we have the illusion of this much cherished sovereignty. Plus America gets back a Royal Family as their own that way, without giving up on their own constitutional preferences. Think more Soviet Era Western Europe.

And let us not forget that harking back to previous ages is an important Propaganda tools. Creating links back to the Roman has been used before. Why not push the link back to the British Era of Empire?

What would the US have to gain from the UK being the 51st State - nothing much, but what do they gain from States like Hawaii?

A nice holiday destination?

RE: Stoke. CONs are right to write it off. There is little vote to be gain there for them. Plus its the same day as Copeland. Its not just an admission of writing off Stoke. Its about concerntrating their efforts on Copeland which will be a read PR success for them. They will use it to beat Labour with, and advocate they have a quantitive measure of support and mandate for Hard Brexit.

I certainly wouldn't want trade deals with any country that gave it's citizens increased rights to come here or us to go there. That was the whole point of Brexit

Well wake up and smell the coffee because that's the realty.

India won't sign a trade deal unless we alter our immigration policy towards them.

Australia wants a migration deal. The US will ask the same.

So we will basically just swap migrant nationalities.

May is in an impossible position.

I thought Hawaii had it's strategic uses Red. Pearl Harbour et al!
Scotland didn't put up with Trumps bully boy tactics so why would the UK?

I certainly wouldn't want trade deals with any country that gave it's citizens increased rights to come here or us to go there. That was the whole point of Brexit, I want, and all the other leavers I know on these boards and my friends just want an even playing field for everyone coming to the UK no matter where in the world they are from. Through the EU we have trade deals with other parts of the world. Do these other countries have special visa/immigration arrangements with us as a result? I don't think so, so why on earth would we start doing deals like that now?

A few points there
1- there is more variation in what the Leave group is than you want to imply. Not all Leave voters want a tight control on immigration. I appreciate that this is what you want. I don't think that's what all Leavers want.
2- unfortunately, all the countries that have answered so far re possible trade deals have done so saying that free trade deal will go hand in hand with some more relaxed rules on immigration. That's India, Australia etc..
3- the UK desperately needs some sort of agreement with someone if it doesn't wat to sink economy wise. That's why we have seen TM and other ministers going everywhere to meet other presidents/PM. Having the ability to establish FTD is essential for the success of Brexit.
4- whatever trade deals we have through the EU will not be valid once we have left the EU. That means that we will have to renegotiate those deals. Atm, they might not involve some FOM with the EU. It doesn't mean that these countries will not insist on itnwhen we negotiate with us.

"I want, and all the other leavers I know on these boards and my friends just want an even playing field for everyone coming to the UK no matter where in the world they are from."

Why Corcory?

"I certainly wouldn't want trade deals with any country that gave it's citizens increased rights to come here or us to go there."

I hate to break it to you...

Corcory isn't Scotland still part of the UK?

"Not all Leave voters want a tight control on immigration. I appreciate that this is what you want. I don't think that's what all Leavers want."

Yes, just ask Brexiteer Daniel Hannan who has repeated at nauseam that if anyone tells you the ref was about immigration, you're talking to a remainer.

What could be better to now be the master of the country that gave birth to their own?

That's what I feel too. Better hope that the Queen lives for 4 more years because I don't think it would happen under her reign. Once Charles became King, then it's all up for grabs - a number of Commonwealth countries will say No Thanks to him as Head of State for a starter.

Lurker here:

Cripes this thread moves fast, but wanted to comment on
a) that article Peregrina posted about California.

Note that guy is a tech CEO, I do think there is an element of Californian's thinking they know how to fix it all and that technology is the answer to all the world's woes. I live in Silicon Valley (only for 6 months tho), it is a crazy place, wages are absolutely sky high. House prices are ridiculous, I have no idea how people who don't have high salaries manage (I work in technology and fortunately the technology salaries are good across the board) . I don't see how this is ever likely to be replicated across the US. Though I do see the similarity with the popular governor and the loads of immigrants comparison. This place is also crazy in terms of the number of immigrants (of which I am obviously one), the tech industry is totally built on immigrants from India, China, Europe. My kids' school is 80% non white. It is good in terms of growth, but the growth and immigration and speed of change over the last 20 years must have been insane.

I also worry that Silicon Valley is somewhat of a bubble and unsustainable, I read an interesting article a while back on this but cannot find it now. Googling reveals many articles saying similar things but non were as good as the original I wanted to post, dammit. It made the point that basically there is a lot of investment based on either data analysis and/or apps/websites, from which they would like to make their money from advertising, but most of these companies cannot get a foot in the door with this sort of thing as google, facebook etc, scoop so much of the money. The same with massive investment in distributed service type things (not sure that is the right phrase) such as Uber/online food ordering etc. There is only so much space in the market. And investment is dying off quite rapidly. Silicon Valley has always been quite gung ho in terms of investing money compared to similar in the UK, but it seems to be harder to get investment. Basically I am quite worried about the future job market here over the next few years, especially with the uncertainty of Trump. Obviously markets such as artificial intelligence, drones, self driving cars etc are still on the up though (though artificial intelligence as applied to say online recommendations and therefore making money via advertising may not be). Obama actually made a speech about the tech industry not so long back saying similar to my first point about technology not being the answer to everything:

techcrunch.com/2016/10/17/president-obama-explains-why-you-cant-run-the-u-s-like-a-startup/

The final thing I’ll say is that government will never run the way Silicon Valley run because, by definition, democracy is messy. This is a big, diverse country with a lot of interests and a lot of disparate points of view. And part of government’s job, by the way, is dealing with problems that nobody else wants to deal with.

So sometimes I talk to CEOs, they come in and they start telling me about leadership, and here’s how we do things. And I say, well, if all I was doing was making a widget or producing an app, and I didn’t have to worry about whether poor people could afford the widget, or I didn’t have to worry about whether the app had some unintended consequences – setting aside my Syria and Yemen portfolio – then I think those suggestions are terrific. (Laughter and applause.) That’s not, by the way, to say that there aren’t huge efficiencies and improvements that have to be made.

But the reason I say this is sometimes we get, I think, in the scientific community, the tech community, the entrepreneurial community, the sense of we just have to blow up the system, or create this parallel society and culture because government is inherently wrecked. No, it’s not inherently wrecked; it’s just government has to care for, for example, veterans who come home. That’s not on your balance sheet, that’s on our collective balance sheet, because we have a sacred duty to take care of those veterans. And that’s hard and it’s messy, and we’re building up legacy systems that we can’t just blow up.

I also particularly like the episode of Silicon Valley where they make a speech saying Hooli is about innovative technology that makes a difference, transforming the world as we know it. Making the world a better place, through minimal message oriented transport layers. - very funny, but kind of illustrates the point.

Red I am not convinced by your digital divide Brexit theory though it's quite a compelling argument. I am not convinced it's as major factor as you think.

I actually worked in Ghana teaching IT about 17 years ago now and the talk all then was of the "digital divide" and globalisation as if it's a bad thing. I think if anything technology is likely to be both a leveller (as it is easily accessible once you can get online) and a disruptor (obviously in terms of job automation etc). Though this being globally across the world (look at the jobs going to India, etc) not just within the UK. And I think the big disruption is to come, though I think effects are already being felt.

I love your story of your mum teaching ICT, as that also happened to my mum (GCSE only though). She taught Typing, which turned into Word Processing and then became ICT. At age 15 we had a big argument as she lost her rag with Excel and I refused to help until she calmed down . Though at our school at least ICT was considered a non-academic option for GCSE and those likely to to go into techy areas would take Computer Science instead. I do think it is a massive issue not teaching more technology and basic Computer Science in schools. It is all well and good saying that kids of today know how to use technology but they do need a grounding in coding skills and principles in order to be most likely to be able to make a success in a techy career. In terms of technology education I do wonder if we will see changes in this area with the number of online course being available. It may make technology careers more accessible to those with talent but not the means to attend university. For example, Coursera, etc do excellent online courses, I have done a couple, and they are in general taken by people from all over the globe. It is possible to see that you could get into a technology career with some independent study if you were sufficiently talented and motivated.

Anyway this has been a technology brain dump. Sorry if it's a bit incoherent, but it's taken me ages to write as it is. And I don't have time to write anything directly Brexit related. Back to work now!

Thanks for the threads. They are genius. I think I am going to drop my MP another e-mail. She hasn't answered my last one, but I will make this one more succinct and direct in demanding answers.

europe.newsweek.com/donald-trump-canada-nafta-trade-547165?utm_campaign=socialflowT&utm_source=socialflowtwitter&utm_medium=articles
Canada Not a NAFTA Target, Has a 'Very Special Status,' Says Trump Advisor
Canada unlikely to be hit hard by changes the United States wants to make to the NAFTA trade accord.

Who would have thought....

Scotland didn't put up with Trumps bully boy tactics so why would the UK

Scotland wasn't desperate for a trade deal, having walled itself off from its main trading partners.

We can't replace the extent of our trade with the EU with US, but we absolutely desperate for a deal with them just to survive.