Westministenders: The Art of the Deal

[RedToothBrush]

Well Trump seems to have put his foot in it.

Not that this should come as a surprise. For all the talk of closer ties with the US that was never going to happen. All that was need was for Trump to over step once too many.

By chance (?) Barnier also raised questions about our commitment to working with the EU on security.

Its almost as if we are being asked to choose whom we look to for security.

Meanwhile it sounds like the divorce bill is sorted - though this may not be as settled as that, if it comes with conditions. The deal might also be backtracked on, seeing as that appears to be the done thing presently.

Talks on Ireland are stalemated with Ireland threating to veto. No sign of a breakthrough here yet.

Talks on EU citz rights are reportedly going backwards (again) rather than going forward.

All of this is theatre for a British audience though, with the UK agreeing to everything. Because they gave again their cards when a50 was triggered.

The crunch is coming on whether we move to stage two before Christmas. We have no time to lose.

Faisal Islam‏ @faisalislam
Opposition to support Lady Hermon Withdrawal Bill amendment on Good Friday Agreement, and Government says will whip against - some Tories to vote for it - worth watching vote

Laura Kuenssberg‏ @bbclaurak 15 minutes ago
Sounds like Commons heading for a v tight vote on whether to put the Good Friday Agreement into the EU bill in Parliament - in about an hour

Thanks Lurking, maybe I'm being a bit dim here.

Or me, probably.

I read a lovely "sorry" on another forum (I know, there do exist) where a poster got something slightly wrong, and apologised saying ..

"fact fatigue"

Being on the Remain side has meant that every comment, assertion, or statement has had to be backstopped with a cite that isn't the Mail, Express or Telegraph.

It wears you down.

I agree Olennis. In local gov we would do short impact assessments as part of options analysis on all the options to be considered/consulted on. Obviously this wouldn't be every possible option, but the most likely or desirable options. Once the preferred option had been decided on a full and detailed assessment would be done to go to the final decision making. This is the process I would expect to be followed here.

The argument that there are too many outcomes is rubbish, there are clearly more and less likely outcomes and basic assessments should have been done for the most likely ones. The cabinet should then have decided on its preferred option and completed a full assessment for that at least. All this should already have been done before we started on negotiations with the assessments being reviewed and refined as the talks progressed. I wouldn't expect them to be right first time and there may be disagreements about what they concluded and whether they have focused on the right ones, but I would expect something to start with.

Of course what we have is not even a smidge of assessment or any decisions from cabinet on what the desired outcome should be.

I don't know why I am saying this here. We are all clearly capable of running a piss up in a brewery, whereas this lot wouldn't know how to identify a beer keg with a flipping illustrated guide.

The Brexit Committee are 'reconvening soon' - does that mean today? And if so, are they all present today?

Did anyone’s catch the media show On radio four just now? They were talking about politicians and the role of journalists and how frustrated journalists are that spin doctors don’t allow long interviews any more so it’s all very superficial. Someone on there (I didn’t catch who or which party he used to work for) said they often tried to cut deals with presenters, giving them access to higher ups in return for not being asked about certain things.

Question: given David Davis said a month or two ago that there were reports in excruciating detail, and that TM would not have read them in full but was aware of their contents, and that TM and the rest of the cabinet did not contradict this, does this not also implicate TM and the rest of them, for lying and bullshitting, if we're now to believe they don't exist?

Faisal Islam‏ @faisalislam
Not pushed to vote by Lady Hermon....

Why?

I don’t understand this. Can someone translate in simple terms please?

Labour Whips
@labourwhips
MPs are voting on SNP Amdt 167. Lady Hermon and Labour pulled our amdts so as not to put people in the position of having an Amdt which enshrined the Good Friday Agreement being voted down by the Govt. Result at 5.30, only one vote, then debate on Financial Settlement

They thought they might lose so didn't want to risk a vote which would leave the government able to do whatever they liked with the GFA by default?

Could be to save it for a later date in the Lords perhaps?

I don't know.

That's my thinking too Red

The sad reality of our current "democracy"

Ah ok, that makes sense. Thanks red.

I thought that there was a possibility they might win this one but perhaps the risk wasnt worth it.

So they can pick and choose what they vote on and so avoid defeat?

Until they need to change something requiring primary legislation ?

Of course such a strategy risks backing the courts up with challenges to SIs issued under secondary legislation ?

(Hands up who was fooled into thinking I had an idea what I was talking about ?)

Confirmation from No 10 that the cabinet is yet to decide what flavour of Brexit they want:

The prime minister’s spokesman told journalists at the afternoon lobby briefing that tje cabinet will discuss the government’s preferred “end state” in terms of post-Brexit trade and security relations with the remaining EU by the end of the year, regardless of what progress has been made in negotiations by that point.

(from the Graun live feed)

Was Hermon's a probing amendment?

Laura Kuenssberg
@bbclaurak
20 Tory MPs write to PM accusing pro-Brexit colleagues of being 'highly irresponsible to seek to dictate terms which could lead to the UK walking away'

Rowena Mason
@rowenamason
So David Davis won't be found in contempt... 10 Tory MPs and one DUP voted that he had complied with resolution on releasing Brexit impact assessments. Rest of Brexit committee (8 opposition MPs) said he hadn't.

This is doublethink alright

Faisal Islam
@faisalislam
Split verdict - but no contempt by Davis votes the Brexit committee because there were no impact assessments

Understand it was an 11-8 vote in favour of the idea that “no impact assessments have been undertaken” so therefore the binding motion has been complied with so no contempt recommendation

Sounds like a vote on party lines on the mmittee - with perhaps the Chair abstaining, as you would unless needed to make a casting vote

Jon Worth
@jonworth
So Davis - having said there were impact assessments and then not publishing them - is not in contempt of Parliament because the IAs didn’t exist and hence couldn’t be published?

Seriously?

#brexit

...and for anyone wondering that was the sound of the rest of my brain exploding.

My words are failing me...argh..

So the agreement was that Davis would release the assessments, but as there are no assessments him not releasing any assessments was in fact releasing all the assessments.

I feel like this awe inspiring leap of logic has caused my mind to transcend into a higher state of consciousness and I can now see through time. Everything is one and the orders of the universe are meaningless to me as I have achieved a 2001 Space Odyssey style state of godhood.

@faisalislam
Full letter from 20 Tory MPs to PM criticising Brexiter colleagues who “seek to impose their own conditions on these negotiations”... and “deliberately make” WTO option “some status quo”

.

@faisalislam
Signed by Nicky Morgan, Sandbach, Vaizey, Grieve, Neill, Stephen Hammond, Ford, Masterton, Soubry, Heald, Streeter, Mercer, Djanogly, Clarke, Lefroy, and two others whose signature I can’t decipher