Westministenders: The Tory Civil War – The Knives Are Out Again. A Big Battle Looms.

[RedToothBrush]

Today has seen the publication of a story about how Johnson and Gove are holding May hostage in a ‘soft coup’ and have made various demands over what they want for a hard Brexit. The letter which was for May’s and Barwell’s eyes only has some how leaked. Don’t forget how Gove has just joined the Brexit Cabinet.

It comes at a time, when the Observer is also leading with an editorial demanding Johnson goes over his handling of the Nazarin Zagheri-Ratcliffe case as well as his long list of poorly judged comments which have had diplomatic consequences and another newspaper is leading with a story about how 40 Tories are ready to no-confidence May.

It all smacks of a personal battle between May and Johnson to govern the party, which has been playing out publicly for some time, most noticeable in the parallel Tory party conference leadership speeches and Johnson’s freelancing.

Johnson also seems to be potentially caught up, with what happens in the Mueller investigation due to a photo and lying about having met Misfud which could be politically damaging.

Priti Patel’s –sacking-- resignation also fits in neatly with the story. The Foreign Office were not informed and there is the curious side story that May DID know various details but told Patel to keep quiet, so not to embarrass the FCO. Or more to the point, be seen to be undermining Johnson.

Whether this is true or not we don’t know. It does have implications if its true, but it also says something if its not too. Why leak the story at all? Once again its about the Johnson v May dynamic.

As it stands, if Gove and Johnson have been leading May then why would they decide to ditch her and go for power without her?
Notably Gove has the best satisfaction scores of the Cabinet amongst Tories on Conservative Home too. He has had a lot of favourable comments over his statements over pesticides. The pair seem to have put differences aside and are working together. And May has become more and more of a liability. Johnson, also came second favourite to be Tory leader amongst Tories (if you discount don’t knows and none of the aboves). Maybe they fancy their chances…

Or it’s a last ditch attempt to cling on to that power as threats that Johnson might finally get the boot – if Zagheri-Ratcliffe does have her sentence extended and Johnson’s position is no longer tenable for even May’s self-preservation. Whilst much has been framed about it being about May’s political survival, its definitely not just her whose future is in doubt. Who was the ‘dead wood’, that young Tories demanded be ditched in a reshuffle to bring in young blood? Either way, Gove has firmly hitched his wagon to Johnson's effectively repeating Johnson's dismissal of Zagheri-Ratcliffe's case.

Anyway another week and another set of high political drama is a foregone conclusion.

A round up of other developments this week:

Tory Party / Government

1. May announces intention to enshrine Brexit leaving date in law to force rebels to tow the line. This has many implications, not least tax related and putting more pressure on the UK government. It’s generally regarded as a desperate move by anyone sane.
2. The Impact Assessments were a dogs dinner that was done at the last minute, and were not worth the paper they were written on. There was no detail to them.
3. Priti Patel’s –sacking—resignation after having undocumented and unauthorised meetings with a series of Israel ministers. And then lying about it.
4. Penny Mordaunt, who lied about the UK not having a veto to stop Turkey joining the EU, replaced Patel.
5. Damien Green Porn. Another ex-policeman is backing the story that it was found on his computer despite Green’s denials.
6. The ongoing Zagheri-Ratcliffe story with Iran and Johnson’s gaff and none apology
7. Photograph of Johnson with ‘The Professor’ Misfud has been found. This links Johnson to how events in the US might pan out. If there are lots more revelations in the Mueller inquiry about him, then that might reflect on Johnson and make him subject to some difficult questions. Politically this might be problematic for Johnson.
8. Claims that the whips office leaked the name of someone who reported allegations against Nigel Evans which occurred 6 months after Evans had been cleared of rape and the sexual assault of six men
9. Suspended Tory MP Charlie Elphicke has complained that he is yet to be informed of what he has been accused of.
10. Young Tory MPs issue threat to May that she brings in young blood and gets rid of ‘dead wood, who do nothing but screw up’. Give her until the New Year to do so.
11. 40 Tories apparently ready to no confidence May.
12. Lord Ashcroft’s latest poll reveals a very small percentage of people want a no deal situation despite all the noise of it being a good idea.
13. Lord Ashcroft mentioned in the Paradise papers. Reported as domiciled in Belize despite assurances given to parliament that he would give up his non-dom status and pay tax in the UK as a Lord.

Parliament / Opposition both inside and outside parliament
14) May facing a possible revolt over Universal Credit. MPs due to vote on reducing wait times.
15) Talk that there are enough Tory Rebels prepared to back a Dominic Grieve amendment to force a meaningful vote on the Brexit Deal.
16) May under increasing pressure from business leaders to make a deal after a meeting with them at no. 10.
17) Lots of distraction in the Paradise Papers generally which raises the question over the power and influence of the super rich versus the poor. This plays well to Labour’s narrative and against the idea of a low tax post Brexit Britain.
18) Lord Kerr, author of the a50 clause states that May has misled the public and insists that it is reversible.
19) New Money Laundering and Sanctions Bill in the Lords. Government looking to omit 4th EU directive on tax avoidance. Naturally raises questions about whether UK would adopt new rules due to come into force the week after Brexit Day.
20) Money Laundering Bill also has lots of overlap with immigration and home office operations, raising some rather sinister questions over who could be affected and why. Potential for abuse seems to be huge.
21) Leave leaning Cornwall and Grimsby seeking special status in the face of Brexit – in line with remaining to preserve business / economic interests
22) Suicide of Welsh Assembly Labour member who was under investigation for sexual harassment
23) A Labour MP accuses the already suspended fellow Labour MP Kelvin Hopkins of inappropriate behaviour.

EU
24) Ireland demands the UK stays in the customs union.
25) Brexit talks have not progressed at all despite apparently being speeded up. Barnier saying that progress in December only possible if UK makes moves on the settlement deal. Prospect of stage two being delayed until March being raised. This leaves just 7 months to come to a deal, which plays to the No Deal Crowd’s interests.
26) EU believe the UK are not working in the best interests of the UK and there is a failure by May and Davis to understand the process or what No Deal will mean.
27) EU signalling that there is no bespoke transition. Only available options ae EEA or EFTA fudges.
28) Increasing view in Brussels that No Deal likely. EU think May hasn’t got the authority to come to a deal and its easier for her to drag UK off the cliff. Though they have doubts she will survive much longer.

World
29) Trump sides with Putin above the US Intelligence Community over the Russian election interference. On Veterans Day.
30) US’s Wilbur Ross said UK will have to dump European food safety standards and that losing our passporting rights to the EU would harm our interests with the US.
31) Developments in Lebanon, with it being said that Saudi Arabia said to have declared war. Many would consider this to be a proxy war against Iran. Crown Prince has purged political opponents including several with significant Wall Street interests. Eight died in a helicopter crash.
32) Large scale far right march in Poland as part of their Independence Day.

All this who is voting for what reminds me of the list of people who voted for the execution of Charles 1. They ended up having to go into exile when the tide of history turned against them.

DS popped (whizzed, on his skateboard) by at the weekend with some sk8erm8s. Got chatting, and One of them mentioned that what was happening in Zimbabwe couldn't happen "in Europe". He was quite shocked when I pointed out that in my (admitted longer ) lifetime, I had seen a revolution which ended with the dictator (and his wife) up against a wall and machine gunned. In a country which is now part of the EU.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trial_of_Nicolae_and_Elena_Ceau%C8%99escu

The killer blow being the lad in question had been further abroad - to Spain - than where that happened. It was closer.

It's interesting that's now over a generation ago. But (as with UK executions) still well within living memory.

He was apparently moved enough by Blue Planet II to vow to change things for some animals though

Michael Gove‏
@michaelgove
Still haunted by last night's #BluePlanet2 - the imperative to do more to tackle plastic in our oceans is clear. We @DefraGovUK will work urgently to identify further action.

No movement on Northern Irish border issues at all?

No movement on Northern Irish border issues at all?

maybe .... if we are very quiet .... we can sneak away with nobody noticing

(In reality, given the lack of reporting on the BBC, you could probably get away with murder. The BBC seems to have given up reporting, and is just issuing Brexit puff pieces every half hour)

Strangely, when Britain was in deepest peril during WW2, the BBC (just radio then) was renowned for trying to be sxrupuous about accuracy.
This gave them great credibility at the time and people in many other countries listened to the BBC as the ir most reliable source of news.

Sadly, the "gentlemen's agreement" to allow the BBC its independence has long vanished and won't return - it's like squeezing toothpaste back in the tube, never works.
Now it's just the news whore for whichever govt is in power; the harder they press their thumbs on the BBC, the more dedicated the mouthpiece
It's all about those in the BBC at all levels prioritising their pay-checks, especially golden at the higher levels

Since it is now the govt mouthpiece and likely to always be so, it should be paid out of income tax , so those wo don't want the govt drone aren't forced to pay for it.

lala I've tried to check how my MP voted for last night's amendment on How They Vote but no information - is there a list of the Customs Union rebels anywhere?

Scroll to the bottom: www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2017-11-20a.758.0

(Obtained via Google search 'MP voting record' -> top hit)

WEIRD (paywall) May bamboozled by Trump’s love talk < vom, not envy >

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news-review/may-bamboozled-by-trumps-love-talk-rh8d02k3d

In spring, with the backlash against Donald Trump’s continually erratic behaviour gathering pace in Britain,
the president and Theresa May held another conversation in which Trump indicated he did not wish his state visit to go ahead if it meant he would face mass protests in the Mall.
....
To those who listened in, Trump’s prickliness was not even the main feature of the call.

More serious, to them, was the way he bamboozled May,
throwing her off her talking points to the degree that she was unable to make the policy interventions that civil servants had planned for her.

“He’s totally disarming,” a Downing Street aide said.
“Normally when she goes into a meeting and she has two delivery points, she will deliver them.
She’ll get a sheet saying:
‘You need to raise this issue.
We want to move things in that direction.
These are our two objectives for the call.
You might also want to raise these points.’

“With Trump, he’ll start with:
‘Theresa, I love you, I’ve missed you.’
She can’t speak to that < too busy vomiting ?>

It’s not the way you are supposed to speak to each other in these calls. < oh really ? >
Her deliverable gets totally shot out of the water and she just can’t grapple with it.”

The aide said May’s calls with Trump were “the only example I saw of her in work not delivering when she set out to deliver . . . " < um, unicorns for Brexit ? >

It shows you something about his power.
He’s a crazy person but there is a charisma and an effectiveness there.
In speaking like that he prevents all sorts of conversations.
He’s completely in control.
It’s deeply worrying.”

Inappropriate or not, the PM of the sixth largest economy in the world is supposed to be able to redirect these types of conversations.

The point, really, is that there is no chance of a meaningful trade deal with the USA.

That's it.

All the rest, frankly, is meaningless fluff - glitter to cover over the real news (which no-one, seemingly, wants to hear - apart from us).

The USA has made it very, very clear that, if it is not about security or jobs for the USA, it's not interested in 'talks'.

All the pre-Referendum nonsense about a great relationship with the USA was just that - nonsense.

There.is.no.USA.trade.deal.

Anushka Asthana
Anushka Asthana
@GuardianAnushka
Sounds like govt are about to offer some sort of concession to see of Dominic Grieve amendment on charter of fundamental rights. Maybe just to think about it!

Law and Policy‏
@davidallengreen

A reality check for Remainers and others unhappy with UK Brexit policy.

For all the accumulating problems, there is still no obvious check to the UK leaving the EU on 29 March 2019.

This will be by automatic operation of law.

The sheer weight of problems will not, by themselves, change the legal position. However severe they become. It doesn't matter at law.

For the position to change would need a formal legal extension, or a revocation/suspension of some kind.

Where would it come from?

/2

There is no general election due.

The Tories-DUP have an overall majority.

Labour front bench support Tory government on Brexit in principle.

"Brace, brace."

/3

Unless those unhappy with Brexit can convert the very real problems into the political and formal action of an extension, suspension or revocation of some kind, then UK leaves EU on 29 March 2019.

And today, cannot see how those dots can be joined.

/ends

Thanks, Eeeee. She seems to have abstained (which means she might as well have voted with the government) . Off to send email.

lala there's a CommonsVote App that lets you see how everyone voted - I think someone on these threads recommended it before. It's pretty handy.

anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/

When Ian Murray's proposed amendment to the EU Witdrawal Bill was defeated there was an eruption of outrage amongst the right-wing of the Labour Party and the appalling self-declared centrist types who propagandise for them on Twitter and in the mainstream media.

How they howled and shrieked that some Labour MPs had voted against the amendment designed to stop the UK from imposing tariffs and quotas on produce from the EU.

In reality the vast majority of Labour MPs abstained on the vote, with just 18 voting against the amendment and 28 voting in favour, meaning that the amendment was always going to fail, and was beaten by 311 votes to 76.

The furious centrist narrative was quickly set that the 18 Labour MPs who voted against the Murray amendment were traitors who were determined to force a Tory hard Brexit by ruling out membership of the EU Customs Union. However this propaganda narrative couldn't be further from the truth.

In reality the Murray amendment would have worked to create an even harder Brexit than even the most foaming-at-the-mouth hard-right Tories are aiming for.

The Murray amendment would have caused a British economic catastrophe by making it impossible for the UK to apply import tariffs or quotas on any products from anywhere in the world, while all other countries could continue to apply import tariffs on the UK!

The reason for this is that if the UK reverts to World Trade Organisation rules (which seems increasingly probable given the shambolic Tory handling of the Brexit process) the WTO "Most Favoured Nation" rule states that unless you have a specific trade agreement, then you must offer the same deal to everyone. So if you've legislated to make it illegal to apply tariffs or quotas on imports from EU countries, then you can't apply tariffs or quotas from imports from literally anywhere else in the world either.

Just think back to the chaos caused by the Chinese dumping cheap steel on the world market. If the Murray amendment had have passed, the UK would have been rendered powerless to stop other larger economies from deliberately wrecking UK industries through strategic dumping.

The UK already has an alarmingly vast trade deficit with the rest of the world, and just imagine how much worse that trade deficit would have got had the rest of the world been allowed to flood the UK with unlimited tariff free imports, while UK exports are subjected to quotas and tariffs at the normal WTO rates.

The idea of totally eliminating tariffs and quotas is actually utopia for hard-right Lassaiz-Faire fanatics, but even most of the hard-right Brexiteers understand that eliminating all tariffs and quotas on imports, while other countries can continue applying them on our exports would be economic suicide.

What Murray's amendment would have achieved is a state of unilateral economic surrender. But somehow the Labour right-wing and the centrist dad types have whipped themselves up into furious outrage over the fact that the Labour front bench had the economic sense to see the dangerous economic illiteracy of the Murray amendment, and ensure that it could not pass.

It should obviously be no surprise to anyone that Ian Murray is a Labour right-winger from the Progress faction of the party, because no left-winger (or anyone with a grain of sense) would want the UK to use Brexit as an excuse to declare unilateral economic surrender.

This whole furore just goes to prove that it's not just the Tories who engage in reality-reversing propaganda, but the Labour Party right-wingers and the so-called centrists do it too.

How else is it possible to explain their furious accusations that the Labour front bench have sided with hard-Brexit Tories, when what they actually did was ensure that Ian Murray's ill-considered amendment didn't end up creating a unilateral economic surrender version of Brexit that's so extreme that even most of the fruit-loop Tory hard-Brexiteers have sufficient sense to steer clear of it!

So if you come across anyone expressing outrage that the Labour leadership opposed the Murray amendment, you can safely conclude that they're just simple-minded ideological partisans who are so desperate to attack Jeremy Corbyn and the Labour left that they have literally no interest in the reality of what actually happened at all. In fact accusing the Labour front bench of colluding with hard-Brexit Tories shows so little regard for the facts that it's obvious that they're (either wilfully or ignorantly) reversing reality.

@JustAnotherPoster00

Good analysis.

Laura Kuenssberg @ bbclaurak
Reuters says Mugabe has resigned

Surely a relief for everyone?

Only took 40 years!

Press Association @ PA
#Breaking Investigation into alleged data manipulation by individuals working at a Randox Testing Services forensics laboratory in Manchester identifies more than 10,000 cases which "may have been affected", National Police Chiefs' Council says

We now enter a world of post truth forensics.

Bet it's down to cost cutting.

3/3
So amendment would mean:
i)Under No Deal the U.K. could not impose ANY tariffs or quotas.
ii)even if we had a Customs Union Agreement with the EU but had a dispute over dumping we would not be able to impose any countervailing tariff to defend our industry
Hope that helps!
70 replies . 417 retweets 438 likes
Reply 70 Retweet 417 Like 438 Direct message

Barry Gardiner‏Verified account
@BarryGardiner
17h17 hours ago
More Barry Gardiner Retweeted Paul Leake
2/3...
WTO’s ‘most favoured nation’ rule says unless you have a specific trade agreement you must give all countries the same tariff & quota deal as you give the most favoured.
So if you can’t give tariffs to EU you can’t to anyone else either!Barry Gardiner added,
Paul Leake

@paulleake
Replying to @BarryGardiner @Peston
Please explain this in more detail Barry as a lot of members are confused
6 replies . 381 retweets 288 likes
Reply 6 Retweet 381 Like 288 Direct message

Barry Gardiner‏Verified account
@BarryGardiner
17h17 hours ago
More Barry Gardiner Retweeted Paul Leake
1/3
Amendment would have stopped Treasury from applying any tariffs or quotas to goods in or out of EU after Brexit. It did NOT keep us in Customs Union as EU could still impose tariffs on us!

Barry Gardiner‏Verified account
@BarryGardiner
18h18 hours ago
More Barry Gardiner Retweeted Robert Peston
Nonsense Robert!
@Peston.
We voted against an amendment that would have taken away any safety net against a No Deal Brexit.
Under WTO rules UK would have been unable to impose ANY tariff on goods from ANY country in the world.
Amendment was illiterate.

Barry Gardiner's explanation of the Labour front bench position. Slightly less mired in the inner workings of the more dysfunctional elements of the Labour Party.

Lala, I did a similar grumpy search for my MP but then realised that I think she’s been out of the country this week.

I see this afternoons BBC propaganda is about Arlene Foster warning he Irish to toe the line ...

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-42064743

Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar "should know better" than to "play around" with Northern Ireland over Brexit, the leader of the Democratic Unionist Party says.

Arlene Foster accused Mr Varadkar of being "reckless" as Brexit talks enter a "critical phase".

She was speaking after meeting Theresa May at Downing Street. The Irish government says any hard border with Northern Ireland should be off the table.

And an EU paper recently suggested Northern Ireland would have to continue to follow many EU rules after Brexit if a hard border was to be avoided. It hinted Northern Ireland may need to stay in the EU customs union if there were to be no checks at the border.

(contd)

I await the US Irish slumbering giant to start to grumble ...

OK, so the Labour Party didn't vote for the amendment because it was poorly drafted? (Why wasn't this pointed out at the time of proposing it?) Is there going to be a similar one that will give the UK some more palatable CU opt-in or is everyone holding fire for the SM amendment?

(Doris - I don't think my MP is away, she just seems more concerned with moving a road crossing in the constituency than tackling Brexit ).

I didn't know about this:

www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/11/21/carbon-trading-the-brexit-cliff-edge-starts-on-new-year-s-da

Brexit begins in six weeks. I do not refer to the many companies that have started implementing their contingency plans, or the friends and colleagues who have packed their bags and left. This is about the first legal implication of Brexit, the first drop from the cliff edge. It takes place on January 1st, 2018, when the UK government loses its right to issue carbon dioxide emission permits. On New Year's Day, the first £400 million tumbles down the cliff.

The EU Emissions Trading System gives countries wriggle-room in meeting environmental targets. Instead of having to reduce their emissions at home, which is much more expensive, they are able to do so abroad. In 2014, a quarter of the UK target was met by reducing emissions in Poland, Romania, and other European countries. This system works well for a wealthy country like Britain. Leaving it is expected to cost us £70-140 million per week.

(Article goes on to say that it's not going to be good for the EU either.)

I don’t need know how much assistance backbench MPs get in drafting amendments. (My recollection of John O’Farrell's book is: not much). With 400-odd amendments one imagines what support there is will have been spread fairly thinly. Certainly though the front bench could have been clearer about the reasons for not supporting th amendment.