Westministenders: The bookends to a year of political chaos. Just how far have we come?

[RedToothBrush]

The 15th June 2016.

The Thames was filled with a flotilla of boats in a publicity stunt for the Leave campaign to draw attention to fisheries. Nigel Farage and Kate Hoey in their heads thought they were Leonardo and Kate, but the moment was rather more titanic in nature and could not have been more Alan Partridge if they had tried. Coming up behind was Bob Gedolf in a shameful and cringeworthy display of swearing and abuse that really didn’t help the Remain camp in anyway. Largely unnoticed was a small boat with a family following it all unfold…

The next day things went from fiasco to horror.

Farage unveiled the Dog Whistle Poster and Jo Cox was murdered. And the UK seemed set on its course for 7 days later when the world was turned upside down by the referendum itself.

14th June 2017.

Fast forward 365 days later and another tragedy unfolded. This time of a very different nature but with no less political significance.
Grenfell.

A moment of national shame. A symbol of so many things that had come to pass in the previous twelve months.

The election just the previous week had changed the direction of travel we seemed to be headed and left the Prime Minister exposed and looking wildly out of touch. The Maybot was given one more chance.

And the Maybot seems to be failing the test of her party who had the grace to grant her a second chance.

The Queen dressed in the same shade of blue, May delivered her ‘victory speech’ in, ignored the security threat and visited the ranks of the poor and the forgotten. A deliberate message to May not to forget who she serves? A Queen who feels aggrieved and angry by May’s behaviour? Who knows.

As for Brexit. The government looks lost. Adrift. The ‘Fight of the Summer’ over the EU’s plan for talks sounds out the window despite the denials from the Brexit Department. Hard Brexit is still on the cards. Apparently. But what does anyone believe now? May’s and the Brexiteers domination of the agenda is shattered, its power starting to be questioned.

What next?

This evening the anger is building.

Who knows, what will happen. Some of it might be predictable, but the future is far from certain and we have definitely entered a new era. We just don’t know who will lead it, or what its ambition or what the end goal now is.

What we do know, more acutely than ever is that we are all human and the wise words of Jo Cox about having ‘More in Common’ ring though ever more strongly.

Once again we feel ‘on the brink’.

The Tories will dump May as soon as they think they can get away with it.
Remember this tweet - as soon as the GE took away her power, the rats came out for blood:

Robert Pestonn @Peston*
Senior Tory MP: "We all f@@@ing hate her. But there is nothing we can do. She has totally f@@@ed us".
4:58 PM - 9 Jun 2017

Been out all day, hence late comments

"Well we can vote for our MEPs. Did you vote last time?"
"No, don't know who they are"

We had a long conversation on a thread a couple of weeks back where someone didn't agree with the EU and therefore didn't go to vote. This poster failed to convince us that this would be seen as a valid protest and just as likely to be seen as a "can't be arsed" stance. Spoiling the ballot paper would be seen to be a protest because the number of spoilt ballots are recorded.

I heard about the right wing challenge to May's leadership on the car radio coming home. First thoughts - this will wreck the Tory party, so bring it on. I would qualify that as the current incarnation of the Tory party, because at one time, pre-Thatcher, there were Tories around who believed in working for the good of their communities.
Then I wondered, how would the other parties vote? Would they pitch in and join the vote of no confidence, or would they be bloody minded and vote to support her to isolate the loony right?
Someone asked if loony right were fanatical enough - yes, is the simple answer, I think.

Two year parliamentary term is shocking.

Looks like they they think fixed term parliament legislation won't be enough. Everything just stinks of railroading it through. Whatever "it" (Brexit) they manage to negotiate, or not negotiate.

I feel like I've woken up in 1629.

The two year Parliamentary term is a slap in the face to anyone who believes the UK is a parliamentary democracy.

What if by-elections change the party scene in the meantime?

Am genuinely shocked by the two year Parliament term

A 2 year term. So they intend to push Brexit through, if they can continue without destroying themselves. The only question is: how hard will it be?

To push the opposite argument, a strong spokesperson for Remain is needed for doubtful people to coalesce behind. Someone who can tell the public exactly the damage that Brexit will do to us, how it will intensify austerity, make most of us poorer, diminish our standing in the world and impoverish us culturally and socially. Someone who can marshal the growing doubts people have and outline an alternative path.

However good JC is for many reasons, I don't believe he is that person. He doesn't seem to want to be.

So who will speak out against Brexit?

Chuka and Lammy already are constantly. Lammy now may have an even more relevant point to make.

The 2-year parliament is unusual, but it's been done before at least a couple of times post-WW2, to squeeze in more time for legislation.

The Fixed Term Parliament Act is a far stronger restriction, imo and a GE can still be called, if a No Confidence vote has passed.

It would be very difficult for the govt to force through a hard Brexit that can be blocked literally by only a handful of Toy MPs voting against, or a dozen abstaining.

So they would need to agree broad principle of Brexit with Labour. So that Labour would at least abstain, preferably vote with the govt, to show the public and the world that there is broad agreement among UK parties on this topic.

Also, the arrangement with the DUP is likely to be extremely ropey and may not even cover Brexit.
Hence the need for broader agreement on Brexit, which would basically take up all the parliamentary time, almost no time for any other bills (on which the parties might disagree)

The real question is whether the govt can last that long, if Labour genuinely decide to bring them down and force a GE before the 2 years are up.

Or whether Labour decide it is better for the country to complete an agreed nonparty Brexit, before normal battle resumes - and would also mean the Tories take the blame / responsibility for Brexit.

Tory MPs, even though they do seem like Toy MPs atm !

Of course, the Tories may decide to reject consensus and try to force through a hard Brexit,
i.e.dare Labour to block them and risk public anger, at least from the Brexit voters

"So who will speak out against Brexit?"

The interesting thing is the Lib Dems did - or at least advocated a 2nd ref. And got 12 seats. Whatever the fttp issues, the maths does let them do much better than that if voters want them to - see 2010.

So I think an outside observer looking in would say voters had the chance to make clear they were against brexit - and as a whole in UK they didn't. And I've seen the explanations for remainers to have voted labour which all individually make sense - but back to the outside observer, as a whole the picture is that voters did not support the party speaking out against brexit. Of course that doesn't mean things can't change.

The number of hardline Brexiteers is probably small, but they are vociferous and set in their views.
The majority of Leavers I believe are open to being swayed against it, but need persuasive arguments and an alternative agenda to be clearly outlined. It's all very confusing right now; we need facts! E.g. An explanation of exactly what the single market is, what we get from it and what it would be like without it.

Prominent leavers have shown little respect for constitutional niceties, this far. They will use any means necessary to push it through.

Again we'll rely on the judiciary and the newly emboldened press, and fellow travellers to respond.

DS asked me when the class action lawsuits over Grenfell would begin. He takes US practice for granted

Spot on.

With Gina Miller, I think that the British are finding that the custodians of democracy is tipping into the judiciary here too. (Kudos to US judges in fighting travel ban) With funding websites, there will be a class action.

However, I fear that many of the victims will remain unknown due to May's immigration law.

On BBC website there's footage of a deserted K&C council offices with stacks of food and donations already just locked inside.

No staff. No co ordination.

Doing the wrong thing makes people angry. Doing nothing makes them furious.

It's all very confusing right now; we need facts!

We need... experts.

Brexit doesn't exist, even in theory.

It means what the hard right choose it to, I think people are gradually cottoning on to that.

Other political and economic theories do, and I think people are cottoning on to that too, especially as they've worked pretty well before.

People's republic of Sheffield, anyone?

I lived in that promised land during Blunkett's tenure, and despite the horror of the miners' strike and Thatch with her fascisty friends. Sheffield kept local services good and definitely affordable, and peaceful. KL was doing the same with the GLC at the time in London.

Neither was perfect. Council rates were high. But the poorest were part of the scheme of things, there were DLA fiascos, public transport meltdown or public housing disasters.

should have read: there were no DLA fiascos etc

This morning, Marr has Hammond and Starmer; Peston has Hammond, Wollaston and Lammy; and Neil has Leadsom. I know which one I won't be watching!

The sudden reappearance of Hammond... wonder why?

Simon Cox @SimonFRCox

Norway has exactly the same free movement rules as EU. A thread on how "EEA" isn't different. 1/
European Economic Area is made by agreement btwn EU states & 3 EFTA states: Norway, Iceland & tiny Liechtenstein t.co/8ybfbjbtl0?amp=1 2/
EU rules on FMoP are in Directive 2004/38. Under EEA Agreement, Norway must implement exactly same rules: para 7 t.co/ZiFKyP2trf?amp=1 3/
Iceland also has full FMoP. Only Liechtenstein (a small town ) has special rules mobile.twitter.com/simonfrcox/status/785224886591557632 4/
But EEA has a "brake" on migration (I hear you say). Well, there is art 112 of the Agreement:
Art 112 is there because the essence of EEA is Single Market & full free movement of capital, services, goods and people. 6/
Art 112 allows for exceptional, temporary restrictions in a sector or region affected by a serious consequence of FM 6/

If UK moved to EEA, could A112 deliver "control over Britain's borders". I can't see how: it's there for a proven crisis 7/
EU FM never caused a regional or sectoral crisis in UK (even before EURef signaled EU ppl and business is less welcome) 8/
A112 only needed when national measures allowed under single market weren't enough. What Free Movement of People crisis could require it? 9/
Suppose EU citizens taking up jobs was seriously pushing down wages? No need for A112: UK has power to impose minimum wage there 10/
Suppose EU cits taking jobs was causing mass unemployment? Never happened & why wd it - unless wages too low & then A112 isn't needed 11/
I can't see any credible situations in which UK wd need to use A112 about FMoP. Can you? 12/
So, not only does A112 not meet Brexiter demands on FMoP, it wouldn't likely be usable at all. 13/
May & Ministers know EEA (& effectively identical Swiss model) are based on same FMoP as EU. They know there's no credible middle road 14/14

George Peretz QC @GeorgePeretzQC

Replying to @SimonFRCox
Isn't the important point re A112 that it's (expressly) unilateral - i.e. neither other parties nor (arguably) EFTA Court can stop its use.
The "sanction" for inappropriate use is a political one - responsive measures by other parties.

George Peretz QC @GeorgePeretzQC
·
9m

What it does IMO is provides a basis for, or a precedent for, a deal trading restrictions on FOM in return for some limitation on UK access.

European Commission @EU_Commission
Replying to @EU_Commission, @MichelBarnier, and
European Commission @EU_Commission
Article 50 negotiations with the UK to begin on 19 June - focus on:citizens' rights, financial settlement, Northern Irish border and more. mobile.twitter.com/EU_Commission/status/875666108375814145/video/1

European Commission @EU_Commission
Agenda for the 1st formal negotiating round.
Negotiations in Brussels ending with press conference @MichelBarnier & @DavidDavisMP #Brexit

European Commission @EU_Commission
Replying to @EU_Commission, @MichelBarnier, and @DavidDavisMP
Our position papers citizens' rights+financial settlement. Our aim: to ensure maximum level of transparency

Ciaran Jenkins @C4Ciaran
Appears to be no UK Govt equivalent of this website.

How can citizens understand Brexit if they are told so little about it?

I can't understand this blind pushing forwards with hard Brexit. It's another misreading of the public mood; the irony being that we actually do really need strong and stable leadership right now but all the Tories are offering is uncertainty and anxiety. I think, with the feeling of chaos which is prevalent right now and the rising anger, the rhetoric of 'no deal is better than a bad deal' is going to be frightening for a lot of people.

So, there is a void into which a decent Remain leader could step. Someone who could actually offer stability and make a positive case for the EU - no more fear and dire warnings but a focus on the benefits and security of staying. That person isn't Corbyn. I don't have confidence in him on the EU. It's a weak point for Labour and they risk alienating supporters on either side. But someone this time really needs to step up and do the job which should have been done last year: the Tories are weak and I think there is the appetite for backtracking especially whilst they are hellbent on this reckless and destructive path which isn't what a lot of people, even Leavers, voted for.

How can citizens understand Brexit if they are told so little about it?

It means what leavers choose it to mean.

Which can work both ways.

Barnier is indicating that no clear offer of rights to EU British citizens could be reciprocated.

I agree Captain.

An answer to these questions are needed:

How much will Brexit really cost, year on year?
What cutbacks to public services will have to be made to foot the bill?
Will prices rise?
Will unemployment rise if businesses leave the U.K.?
Will we feel even poorer for many years?

Unfortunately we may only get the answers when it's too late.

Yorkshire blogger found Breitbart London is spreading fake news smears about Grenfell:

http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.de/2017/06/the-chief-editor-of-breitbart-london-is.html

Other rightwing sources have been joining in, trying to smear, to deflect any negative PR from the govt

The Telegraph had a front page about fake Grenfell news - but blaming the left

Expect more fake news - and a hardright Tory "coup" - if Hammond & co try to move towards EEA /EFTA Brexit

So I think an outside observer looking in would say voters had the chance to make clear they were against brexit - and as a whole in UK they didn't

That's ignoring fact that the LDs had no chance in many areas. With no chance of actual power, many figured it was a wasted vote. There were two parties that had a chance and many Remainers voted Labour tactically to stymie the government. Keir Starmer admitted that in a recent interview.