Westminstenders: The wrong homework

[HashiAsLarry]

I'm no rtb but I'll give it a shot, though her efforts deserve much more than me.

The August negotiation round has, well, fizzled out in much the same way as any other. It's taken over a year to get to written position papers and there's still no clue as to a direction from the UK government.

Japan, meanwhile, is about to sign off on a deal with the EU. A deal we want to copy.

@faisalislam
^but if post brexit britain's trade deal with third biggest economy in world is to be based on Brussels' deal, what about rest? TTIP? Canada?
...when PM signs off statements like this on primacy of EU-third party deals, one wonders how temporary the temporary customs union will be^

The NHS is now launching a drive to recruit foreign GPs, like the ones that have left thanks to Brexit. It's a good job they'll be £350m a week better off now. Oh hang on...

my DH managed to do GCSE history at an academically selective school without learning that religion was involved in any way in the gunpowder plot.
Now I think about it, I wasn't taught that either
I know it from later life but not through school.

mobile.twitter.com/mattholehouse/status/905394049179365377

Germany committing a "wanton act of economic self-harm" by not pushing for trade talks with UK, says Tory MP Chris Philp

Just at the boggling lack of self-awareness that is now our most prominent national characteristic.

You do an injustice to the Ladybird Books there. I still have my series of Ladybird Books of British Birds, and they are as good as many other more weighty tomes! But I digress.

Religious differences are often a peg to hang other grievances on. Similarly 'the will of the people' to leave the EU is IMO a peg to hang the grievances against austerity on.

David Allen Green‏*@davidallengreen*
Interesting, on what is happening at @DExEUgov. Dunno if true but has ring of truth.

www.politico.eu/article/britains-other-brexit-battle-david-davis-olly-robbins-feud/
Britain’s other Brexit battle
Even as London negotiates with Brussels, a battle has been taking place inside the department charged with extracting the UK from the EU.

Steve Bullock‏*@GuitarMoog*
Key take from this as ex-CS is that, if true, the distinction between neutral civil servants and Ministers may be being blurred on Brexit 1/
Call me naive, or an idealist, if you will, but talk of CSs bypassing ministers, or being close to PMs sits uncomfortably with me 2/^
And talk of being pro- or anti- Brexit, or anything for that matter, when it comes to Civil Servants is very deeply uncomfortable 3/
Of course Senior CSs must establish trust with Ministers, but it's ultimately their job to speak truth to them, however uncomfortable 4/
CSs are not political. It doesn't matter what their personal beliefs are, and their influence should never depend on this. 5/
Moreover, ministers should (and largely do) demand this, without fear of CSs relationships with their CAB colleagues or the PM 6/
If this breaks down, look forward to a US or even German-style system, where backing the wrong political horse can ruin a CS's career 7/
That should never be allowed to happen, so I very much hope this article is exaggerated, or that I am reading to much into it. 8/8

www.politico.eu/article/brexit-negotiation-europe-tajani-phase-1-might-not-be-over-till-christmas/
EU’s Tajani: Brexit phase 1 might not be over till Christmas
The European Parliament president sees little in the way of ‘sufficient progress’ but plenty of ‘foggy proposals.’

UK wanted to go to stage 2 at earliest possible time. Timetable was October. EU said only if we make progress.

Now talk of slippage to Christmas by the EU.

Talks are going to break down in October.

First debate in the Commons of the Brexit Bill is this afternoon btw.

Labour’s spokesman goes beyond party rethink last month on trade ties
It's like labour are watching the Tories' brexit collapse and backing slowly out of the door.

my DH managed to do GCSE history at an academically selective school without learning that religion was involved in any way in the gunpowder plot.
I thought that this was just part of the national consciousness, rather than something people got taught at school. I don't remember not knowing the story of the gunpowder plot with religion being a huge part of that.

Peregrina's mention of the ladybird book of 'british ' birds oddly echoed a random thought I had earlier this morning.Its completely random, but related to that leaked immigration policy document.

I was reading an article about wildlife migration. I knew about swallows and house martins but didn't know that the massive British bird exodus includes wagtails and doves.Arrivals also include some blackbirds, which arrive from Norway. Also some butterflies fly thousands of miles including red admirals and painted ladies, which arrive from Spain, as do some dragonflies apparently.

It just struck me that migration is a natural thing, as old as life itself.

According to Vince Cable, who is pretty reliable, there have been numerous previous suppressed government reports which highlighted the economic boost we get from new arrivals to the UK. We also all know there is an acute need for workers in some sectors.

So mobility is an ancient and natural thing, why do some people and politicians in the UK have such an extremely negative reaction to it.

As you were!

It could be argued that migration drives evolution ... (did I just hear JRM explode ?)

I think you can argue that migration drives cultural re-awakenings. Think e.g. of the collapse of the Byzantine Empire, a westward movement of people, and the Renaissance starting in Italy.
I think I need to work this idea up more.

As far as Brexit is concerned, I unfortunately feel that, like Nazi Germany, it has to work through to a conclusion, and the cost will be high, not just in monetary terms but human ones too. Farage, Davis, Johnson, May etc. will all be able to run away from the worst effects, so it will be you and me that bear the burden because we won't have an escape.

Meanwhile (Today, R4) a former Labour whip - Stringer ?? - was insisting he will vote for the Repel Bill as to do anything else would be an affront to the electorate.

Graham Stringer is one of the Lexit merry band. Greater Manchester, which includes his constituency, voted over 55% Leave. In his constituency, his share of the GE vote went from 62% to 70% from 2015 to 2017 because he cannibalised the UKIP vote. Quite difficult to argue he is not reflecting the views of his electorate. (More difficult for neighbouring Lisa Nandy to vote against the Bill imho).

The same comment would also apply to Frank Field. Even Kate Hoey increased her share of the vote on an increased turnout in her constituency.

Also the more Sir Keir pushes the more difficult he makes the issue for Labour MPs in Leave areas.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/sep/06/britain-must-solve-problem-of-irish-border-post-brexit-say-leaked-eu-papers
New leak of Brexit papers reveals fissures between Britain and EU

•Second tranche of documents is revealed to Guardian
•Irish border and customs rules threaten fresh deadlock

The EU will risk heightening tensions with the UK onBrexitby publishing five combative position papers in the coming days, including one that places the onus on Britain to solve the problem of the Irish border, according to documents leaked to the Guardian.
The Irish document shows thatMichel Barnier, the EU’s chief negotiator, will call on the UK to work out “solutions” that avoid the creation of a hard border and guarantee peace on the island.
The leaks come a day after theGuardian obtained a draft memoshowing the British government’s position on post-Brexit EU migration, which has been denounced as “completely confused”, “economically illiterate” and “a blueprint on how to strangle London’s economy”.
TheIrelandpaper is one of five due to be published by the European commission in the coming days. Each is dated 6 September and was drawn up by Barnier’s article 50 taskforce in Brussels.
Together, the papers lay bare the complexity of disentangling Britain from the European Union. Each paper is focused onwithdrawal day, 29 March 2019, delving into technical minefields not dealt with during the referendum campaign.
EU proposals include:
A demand – likely to inflame Brexiters – for the UK to legislate for the“continued protection” of special foods such as Parma hamand feta cheese, as well as French burgundy and Spanish cava. Brussels wants to ensure that more than 3,300 food and drink products are protected from British copycats after Brexit.
Ensuring that any goods in transit on Brexit day would be subject to the jurisdiction of the European court of justice. In effect, British companies and the British government would be liable to fines from Brussels for breaking EU VAT and customs rules.
A warning to the government that it must guarantee EU data protection standards on classified EU documents. If not, the EU wants these documents erased or destroyed.
Asking Britain not to discriminate against EU companies which are carrying out state-funded infrastructure projects that began before Brexit day.
Taken together, the five papers reinforce the EU’s determination to focus exclusively on the Brexit divorce issues, spurning Brexit secretary David Davis’soffer to be more “flexible and imaginative”and move to trade.
TheIrish borderis the biggest conundrum caused by the vote to leave the EU, a point underscored by Brussels’ acknowledgment that the Irish document is “different from other papers”.
Brussels intends to say the UK should shoulder responsibility for the border, spelling out that the Brexit vote has caused the problem. “The onus to present solutions which overcome the challenges created on the island of Ireland by the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from theEuropean Unionand its decision to leave the customs union and the internal market remains on the United Kingdom,” states the EU’s Brexit position paper on Ireland.
The Ireland paper, which is to be discussed by EU diplomats on Thursday, heightens the pressure on Davis, whose plans to allow UK officials to manage the border for the EU wererejected as “magical thinking”barely a week after they were published. At the weekend, Davis appeared to ditch this “blue-sky” plan and said a “conventional approach” was more likely, without spelling out further details.
Barnier, who was the European commissioner responsible for setting up EU funds to promote peace after the Good Friday agreement, is also due to set out his thinking on Brexit at a press conference on Thursday.
The paper emerged days after Barnier met Ireland’s foreign minister, Simon Coveney, in Brussels. Coveney told the EU negotiator that the UK’s decision to leave the EU had “potentially an extraordinarily negative impact on Ireland and on the island of Ireland”.
The commission’s paper states that “there needs to be a political commitment to protecting the Good Friday agreement”, although it does not go as far as EU officials did recently when they warned against using Ireland as a “bargaining chip”.
Irish politicians would prefer the UK to remain in the EU customs union, as the safest way to avoid the border posts that became targets for nationalist paramilitaries during the Troubles. But remaining in the customs union would mean the UK would lose the power to negotiate its own trade deals, a key demand for Brexiters.
As such, Davis hopes the UK can remain in a customs union with the EU but in Brussels his plans are seen as vague or unrealistic.
The latest tranche of documents comes a day after the Guardian published a leaked Home Office report that revealed a possible blueprint for a post-Brexit immigration policy.
Yvette Cooper, the chair of the home affairs select committee, said she would be demanding answers from ministers following the leak because it suggested the government was not prepared to wait and listen to independent advice on the issue.
She argued that the government’s process for developing policy was“completely confused”and asked if any assessment had been made about the relationship between immigration proposals and any trade or single market deal.
The London mayor, Sadiq Khan, said of the document: “It reads like a blueprint on how to strangle London’s economy, which would be devastating not just for our city but for the whole country.”
The Green party co-leader Caroline Lucas described it as “economically illiterate and cruel”.
The plans had a mixed reception in Brussels. One source said there was anger and real frustration that the UK is going for a “hardcore domestic immigration policy”.
But many did not share this view. One usually outspoken politician, who closely follows Brexit, declined to comment, deeming the issue “a matter for the UK as a third [non-EU] country”. The issue came up at an internal meeting in the European parliament, where “there was a general sense that it was the UK’s sovereign decision to put in place a migration policy”, a source said.

I'm afraid I haven't had a chance to give it more than a cursory glance as I'm at work but it seems interesting

HOUSE OF LORDS CONSTITUTION COMMITTEE ISSUES INTERIM REPORT ON EU (WITHDRAWAL) BILL

publiclawforeveryone.com/2017/09/07/house-of-lords-constitution-committee-issues-interim-report-on-eu-withdrawal-bill/

About 65% of Labour voters supported Remain, about the same as Tories who supported Leave

For a party that is looking to the future, it is critical to have the votes of the under-45s - which was the rough dividing line wrt Brexit - especially the young, who are overwhelmingly Remain.

In Labour "Leave" constituencies, ntbo, the Leave vote there included voters from all the other parties too.

The question is, how many Labour voters would stay home or vote Tory or UKIP, not the votes of those who would never vote Labour.

Also, where the Lexiters are in seats with large Labour majorities, they are probably pretty safe, especially as the Tories are making a total pig's ear out of Brexit.

Labour are probably weighing up Leave seats with small majorities over a combination of Tory and UKIP
vs wanting to retain seats where there was a large Remain vote Liberals (or SNP)

They'll need to pick up Tory seats to take power and the more liberal Ories are those who were strongly Remain.
They can't compete with May / JRM on walking away without a deal and on immigrant-bashing

Twitter.

Yes, I know several of us here are Remainers in our 50s and 60s, but I'm talking at population level

www.conservativehome.com/platform/2017/09/peter-lilley-dont-lose-your-head-over-henry-viii-powers.html
Peter Lilley: Don’t lose your head over ‘Henry VIII powers’

OMG, how badly does he understand the Repel Bill??? The dismissal of issues is gobsmacking. If you want to pass this thing, sort them out.

Policed by the courts?? Fine if you can afford to go to court. Plus this doesn't resolve the problem of where you refuse law if you leave the ECJ. The whole point is the Repel Bill isn't fit for purpose and could result in the 'law falling over' as I've seen it described in one place.

www.ft.com/content/e212dc8d-9d1f-3c75-9bcc-76f5c21aa47d?emailId=59aed0709871500004228e6d&segmentId=488e9a50-190e-700c-cc1c-6a339da99cab
Watch the repeal bill turn into a battleground

David Allen Green explains in this article.
Extract from

Peter Walker‏ @peterwalker99
David Davis agrees with Tory backbenchers that MPs opposing EU repeal bill would be "a vote for chaos" and "not in the national interest".

David Allen Green‏*@davidallengreen*
These are for the widest imaginable discretionary powers for the government to make or unmake almost any law.

Think about this.

Yes, there's Godwin's law (do you prove, affirm or break that law?).

Yes, there is the "Enabling Act".

But 1933 just one example.

Many governments want to make (or amend or abolish/repeal) laws by mere decree.

It is handy and convenient.

If you were a minister facing difficulties, regardless of any liberal sentiments, you would be tempted by such discretionary law-making too.

(RTB - Hello Obama - another cracking example. Look how its working out well with Trump with the precedent set)

There is always a good reason for the discretionary powers. And the abuse of such powers is what other people do, the baddies. Not us.

And, frankly, for much law-making there is a point to such an approach.

Due law-making can be slow, messy, unpredictable, "inefficient".

Faced with difficulties, and asserting a good purpose, anyone can soon nod-along with wanting to bypass parliament. Not just "them".

But parliament should be wary about nodding-along with "national interest" and "a vote for chaos" attempts to deter amendments to this Bill.

The discretionary powers which are to be conferred on ministers in this Withdrawal Bill are unprecedented. Astonishingly wide.

There is no doubt discretionary power to make or unmake laws is necessary for Brexit to have any chance of being done.

But there is no good, objective reason for the powers to be this wide, and with so few real safeguards.

Anyone in favour of these powers as proposed should just ask: what could your political opponents do with these very same powers?

One can quite imagine the likes of Davis, Raab, Gove speaking darkly of an assault on parliament if Corbyn used these very same powers.

Brexit can revive British parliamentary democracy. Not because of UK departing the EU, but in how parliament chooses deals with it.

/ends

Anyone in favour of these powers as proposed should just ask: what could your political opponents do with these very same powers?

This is why - with the best will in the world - I have a deep mistrust of Corbyn here.

I can't shake the suspicion that his long game is to acquire all these powers as a gift on a plate to the hard Brexiteers, and then appropriate them to build the Peoples Republic of Britain.

Re LibDem / SNP / Labour 3 way split in Scotland, Labour could take huge chunks out of the SNP but that does not help them reach a Westminster majority. They need to focus on depriving the Conservatives of seats, which now includes 13 in Scotland. In any case up to a third of SNP voters are estimated to be pro-Brexit and in many seats this would be enough to lose their majority.

The argument about the ability to sacrifice votes in safe seats could equally be made about Remain Labour areas and iirc there are far more ultra safe urban Remain seats than marginal provincial Leave seats. (I think the stat is something like 65% of 2015 Labour voters (ie excludes 2017 UKIP flippers who are Leave and) were Remain but about 65% of seats were Leave - happy to be corrected as this is just from memory)

www.theguardian.com/business/2017/sep/06/deutsche-bank-boss-says-big-number-of-staff-will-lose-jobs-to-automation?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=242603&subid=18573163&C

Interesting follow up piece on Deutsche. Seems to suggest loss of banking jobs is inevitable and not necessarily anything to do with Brexit since main competitors with Frankfurt are Singapore and New York rather than rEU.

Kind of surprised he still has accountants working as human abacus since most of the roles I saw 20 years ago were already automated below the review level. In fact most of the routine review was also fully automated.

Could be mother

So far the plan is working out pretty well for my side of the debate. TM and co delivering Brexit and the SNP just announced half of the UK Labour manifesto in their Holyrood order of business.