Westministenders: Its time to fire the starting gun. At our own heads.

[RedToothBrush]

Its time for the suicide. The note will say simply, "The EU made us do it".

David Davies, says that despite May’s assertion that no deal is better than a bad deal for the UK, that actually we don’t know this as he hasn’t got round to quantifying the impact of no deal.

He still has no answers for anything apart from “I dunno” and “I’ll do it later”. I can’t wait for when the dog ate my homework excuse.

After 9 months. That’s how far we’ve got. Brexit negotiation skills will have 18 months (not 2 years as it’ll need to be ratified). We are still hiring people for the Brexit department. What about all these EU agencies that the UK will have to replicate and hire and train up in 2 years time?

I’m still waiting for Davies to tell me what all these potential benefits he keeps going on about are too. Benefits for who exactly? Ah yes we know the answer to this one too, even if its not being said. Its political elites and elites with lots of money who can consolidate power and enslave the population through debt and desperation. Goodie. Just what I’ve always wanted. As long as I can wave my Union Jack. Oh. Shit. Bugger.

Nicola Sturgeon, has been doing a good job of showing Brexiteers exactly what they look like to Remainers by holding up the mirror of irony to the Vampires of the 19th Century State. The sight of them tripping over themselves saying its irrational to hold a ‘blind vote’ and that the economic argument is flawed is hilarious. If you are not British.

Hammond has been forced to u-turn on NIC budget announcement as it was not in the spirit of the manifesto. What happened to the manifesto pledge to the protect interests in the Single Market. Lets be honest, the New Tory Manifesto read simply: “We’ll wing it and see what we can get away with”. I wonder how many people would vote for that.

Its Brexit at all costs. No matter what. We must keep the foreigners out. Even though Davis hasn’t done an assessment on the financial impact of migration. Just think about that for a second. Actually don’t because you might actually want to shoot yourself in the head.

At best the government are still relying on Game Theory as a basis for their negotiations and the EU are already going, “Er we don’t think so”.

Perhaps this is the intention of May’s tour to build consensus. She’s handing out guns and bullets to anyone who displays rational thought, to blow their own brains out.

May’s weakness is her manner and her chip on her shoulder for the law. Her own party are not immune to it. She seems to think trade deals are not done based on goodwill. May’s weakness is Britain’s folly.

Pass the blindfolds round, and get on your knees and await our own execution by our own hands.

Bang.

RIP The United Kingdom and Northern Ireland. I will remember you with nostalgic fondness but equally with bitterness and shame. Our finest hours are long since passed (and were tainted with the excesses of exploitation anyway) and we must accept this as part of the process of ‘accepting Brexit’.

Now its time for the empty hand to start being shown and the blame game to begin in earnest. The politics of hate have only just begun and the divorce has not started yet. Scotland, Northern Ireland and Gibraltar are the kids we might not get custody of.

We’ll be blacking up again, running around groping women like Benny Hill and pushing people back into the closet as we hit the off switch before you know it. As well as having nice shiny new ID cards we’ll have to pay for the privilege of owning and carrying at all times, to prove we aren’t nasty illegal immigrants or those equally nasty legal ones clogging up our NHS (by working for it).

Don’t worry though. Uncle Donny will save us. If he doesn’t die suddenly after eating a bowl of Russia soup or have a fatal heart attack after accidentally falling out of a tenth story window.

Has 'remain' weaponised DD? Maybe he's an EU double agent?

Jo Maugham QC‏ @JolyonMaugham 3m3 minutes ago

They haven't asked what 'no deal' costs. Or if there's any way back. They don't know. They don't care. This isn't Government. It's religion.

"Davis argued that as big an issue as tariffs were potential border delays, which could possibly be avoided through the extension of electronic, light-touch customs checks after Brexit.

Under such “authorised economic operators” arrangements, more than 90% of cross-border traffic can be cleared in five seconds, Davis said."

As I've said before, sounds easy in theory.

Now hire the programmers / agency to write that software and make the deadline. GOOD LUCK WITH THAT. I hear there is a shortage of skills in that area of work at the moment...

Honestly though - has anyone ever seen such a shambolic government get away with so much? One MP being interviewed under caution for election fraud, others having their election expenditure under question, Davis with not a clue about the costs of Brexit, and the Chancellor's budget has just blown up.

Will there be a straw which breaks the camel's back?

God, these move fast! Thanks Red.

Number two:
www.theguardian.com/global/2017/mar/15/second-tory-reveals-police-investigated-him-over-spending-allegations

"A second Conservative MP has revealed he was interviewed under caution over allegations about overspending in the 2015 general election.

Will Quince, MP for Colchester, said police had told him there would be no further action against him after the interview, which took place in January.

Kent police interviewed Craig Mackinlay, the Tory MP for South Thanet, under caution last week over allegations that local campaign spending limits were breached during his electoral battle against Ukip’s Nigel Farage.

There is growing panic in the Conservative party about the scale of police investigations into election spending, which could affect dozens of MPs. A separate Electoral Commission inquiry into whether the national party broke election spending limits is also under way and expected to come to a head within weeks".

dozens of MPs.
Poor old Hammond's dead cat tactic can't hide this too.

After 9 months. That’s how far we’ve got. Brexit negotiation skills will have 18 months (not 2 years as it’ll need to be ratified).

It's only 18 months if the EU adhere to the same timetable as the UK. Haven't they already said they won't? May's schedule to trigger article 50 and come to the negotiating table may be before the end of March, but the EU have said brexit is not their priority and they won't be able to start negotiations until June at the very earliest.

Bloody hell - what a shit storm they've got coming their way. In any other circumstances, the government would be teetering but.... Jeremy Corbyn.

Incidentally, I don't think the government manufactured the U-turn to deflect attention from Davis's select committee performance (they would have done something much less risky like get BoJo to compare Tusk to Pol Pot) but, fuck, there's a lot of bad news to bury today. Did anyone ask about the expenses investigation at PMQ - or can't they while it is on-going?

Does anyone know what the status of the UK vis a vis qualified EU majority and veto powers will be once we are under A50 rules ?

I can't believe the UKs veto would be permitted, once it has indicated checking out.

This is probably the most important unanswered question, IMHO. Because if the UK triggering A50 strips us of our veto, the EU can be making whatever changes it wants in the next two years, safe from the UKs meddling. I am thinking in particular of whatever changes would be needed to accommodate an independent Scotland in the event that Scotland (a) becomes independent, and (b) wants to join/remain in the EU.

I for one would find it hilarious if the moribund, sclerotic (and let's face it, slightly foreign) EU were able to outpace the UK during the A50 window.

I find it illuminating that a lot of dim people assume that the conditions for IndyRef2 have to be the same as 2014. Everything has changed since then (apart from their view of the world).

Because if the UK triggering A50 strips us of our veto, the EU can be making whatever changes it wants in the next two years, safe from the UKs meddling.

If A50 strips us of our veto, then we'll just stop our payments immediately. Then "the EU can be making whatever changes it wants in the next two years, safe from the UKs money".

then we'll just stop our payments immediately.
I can well imagine that Theresa May would do that. Whether this is a wise course of action for a country hunting around for trade deals is a different matter - the other countries will see a UK which reneges on its debts. Would you want to do business with someone who didn't pay if they didn't feel like it?

But we're speshul. Surely everyone knows that.

*I keep wondering what would be the reaction of Ofsted if my colleagues and I were to answer them at inspection as David Davis has done.
What would happen if we were to produce no evidence and to tell them "I haven't looked into that yet" when asked about the EYFS or Prevent.

I suspect we'd be classed as Inadequate. If we were schools, we'd be placed in Special Measures. We might even be shut down with immediate effect.*

I am not wondering what would happen if you ran a business like that. Plans on the back of a fag packet, no idea of the financial implications of your strategic options. It is simple, you would go bust, or if you were lucky "managed decline" or the CEO would get sacked before they had chance to run the business over a cliff

This isn't just negotiation, this is Westminster negotiation

LH Article 50 doesn't deal with this, only that the UK can't vote on accepting its own deal, as in section 4:

"4. For the purposes of paragraphs 2 and 3, the member of the European Council or of the Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or Council or in decisions concerning it."

http://www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-European-union-and-comments/title-6-final-provisions/137-article-50.html

I read last year some Brussels rumblings that if the UK - possibly as a scorched earth negotiating tactic - deliberately abused its veto or voting rights during the period between invoking A50 and actual Brexit, then it could lose voting rights under Article 7, as in section 3:

"3 .... the Council, acting by a qualified majority, may decide to suspend certain of the rights deriving from the application of the Treaties to the Member State in question, including the voting rights of the representative of the government of that Member State in the Council. In doing so, the Council shall take into account the possible consequences of such a suspension on the rights and obligations of natural and legal persons."

www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/7-article-7.html

Oops Article 7:
www.lisbon-treaty.org/wcm/the-lisbon-treaty/treaty-on-european-union-and-comments/title-1-common-provisions/7-article-7.html

If you can't beat them, join them ... I've just asserted as a FACT - that the UK will lose it's veto when A50 is triggered. Someone challenged me so I asked them to show me I'm wrong. Now they've not challenged me.

I think I know how to play Brexit !!!! Wow, the fun I shall have !!!

Damn facts

I notice Theresa May has been lecturing the Scots on EU rules - rather brave of her.

I can imagine the EU changing the rules just to make her look more stupid. I know I would.

From an old blog by Liberal ex-MEP Andrew Duff, British MEPs would have the right to vote in the DU Parliament on the eventual deal.
However, the UK reps in Council of Europe etc would not - he refers to 20 out of 27, not 28, as in A50:

"The qualified majority needed in Council to approve the withdrawal agreement will be 20 out of the 27 states.
The withdrawal agreement will also have to be approved by the UK parliament as well as by the European Parliament (when British MEPs will retain full voting rights).

But it is not envisaged that the EU 27 will have to submit necessarily the agreement to their own national parliaments for ratification "
< Phew, presumably then not to regional parliaments either, so might not be scuppered by Walloon ! >

http://verfassungsblog.de/brexit-article-50-duff/

Scotland Options: Knowledgeable article by Tobias Locke, Senior Lecturer in EU law at Edinburgh Uni:

"... it would take Scotland some time after an independence vote to extricate itself from the UK.

This means that if an independence referendum were held in autumn 2018 or in early 2019, Scotland would leave the EU together with the UK even if such a referendum yielded a ‘yes’ result.

Scotland would thus have to apply for EU membership from outside on the basis of Article 49 TEU.

It would need to fulfil the usual accession requirements, in particular adoption of the EU acquis and participation in the Economic and Monetary Union.

In theory, Scotland would also need to commit to becoming part of the Schengen area, but it might be successful in negotiating an opt-out from this given the long-standing Common Travel Area between the UK and Ireland, which could in the future include an independent Scotland.

Accession could be negotiated relatively quickly given that Scotland currently complies with much of the EU acquis.

Nonetheless, a transitional arrangement – such as temporary membership of the European Free Trade Area (EFTA) and the European Economic Area (EEA) – would be necessary to ensure that Scotland stays within the single market.

Interestingly, Nicola Sturgeon’s speech does not commit an independent Scotland to EU membership. She might therefore decide to campaign for an independent Scotland in the single market as a member of EFTA/EEA rather than in the EU.

Moreover, it would potentially make trade between Scotland and rest of the UK (rUK) easier to manage. The volume of that trade is reported to be four times greater than between Scotland and the EU.

In contrast to EU membership,
EFTA/EEA membership does not prevent member states from having free trade arrangements with third countries (i.e. the rUK).

If the rUK’s relationship with the EU is either on WTO terms (in case of the UK crashing out of the EU without a deal) or based on a relatively basic free trade deal, Scotland would be able to come to a better arrangement with rUK.

Whether Scotland could remain in a customs union with rUK – as proposed in the Scottish Government’s paper ‘Scotland’s Place in Europe’ released in December – would depend on whether current EFTA/EEA countries would insist on Scotland committing to sign up to EFTA’s 27 free trade deals with third countries. This is a requirement found in Article 56 (3) of the EFTA Convention.

http://verfassungsblog.de/once-more-unto-the-breach-an-independent-scotland-europe-and-the-law/

Scotland would thus have to apply for EU membership from outside on the basis of Article 49 TEU.
It would need to fulfil the usual accession requirements, in particular adoption of the EU acquis and participation in the Economic and Monetary Union.

A lot can change in 2 years ...

Does anyone know what the status of the UK vis a vis qualified EU majority and veto powers will be once we are under A50 rules ?

I actually think, this itself is not resolved and is open to debate rather than being definite.

The UK want to do our terms of leaving alongside our future arrangements as it changes the issue of majority v unanimity. The EU have already said they don't want to do things that way.

We could easily take 18months just trying to work out shit like that! Unless we have some goodwill to start with.

Which is why the cliff edge scenario is more likely than not in my mind as it stands.

We could easily take 18months just trying to work out shit like that! ......
Which is why the cliff edge scenario is more likely than not in my mind as it stands.

Which given that David Dimwit has had the better part of nine months and hasn't got round to thinking about things like EHIC, or that Mayhem only now seems to have decided that she ought to make more effort with Wales, Scotland and N Ireland, seems more than likely.