Westministenders: One for the Women

[RedToothBrush]

Just remember that women are more likely to be worried about Brexit.

Their women's and workers rights are more at risk from departure from the EU, the ECJ and potentially the EHCR.
They are more likely to be worried as EU citizens in the UK due to taking time to have and raise families.
They are more likely to have been badly affected by austerity and an economic downturn will hit them first.
If they are leavers they are more likely to have changed their minds.
They are less likely to be MPs so have less representation.
They are more likely to be feeling politically unrepresented by any party and unsure of who they will vote for at the next election.
They are more likely to get abuse for expressing a political opinion. Many report having been subjected to sexual harassment from political colleagues.
They are more likely to be the target of abuse on social media.
They are earn less than their political colleagues, they earn less than their media colleagues, they earn less than their business colleagues. They are less likely to be in powerful lobby groups.

Then there's #metoo

And to cap it off women's groups are finding it hard to get their voice heard, and are frequently being labelled as hysterical or bigoted for merely wanting to discuss things and be reassured that their fears are acknowledged. They are frequently dismissed as liars or over sensitive.

This is 2018.

It doesn't feel progressive. It doesn't look equal.

Brexit has more of an impact on women.

Somerville Yes.

It's another example of something that I can't quite believe we're being asked to accept.

News of Shankar Singham's departure was reported on Friday so not sure that if it can be linked to the leak, though he may have known it was coming I suppose? Or are they not linking it to the leak in the first place and I've just assumed that's what they're doing?

@GeorgePeretzQC
This seems right to me. NB point 7: the legal case falls if the EU Act 2011 is repealed
The plan is to repeal it. See these provisions in the EU Withdrawal Bill.
Schedule 9 to the bill — and clause 17(7) - repeal the whole of the EU Act 2011. Along with the referendum provisions.

You also, though, need to look carefully at clause 19 - thrillingly titled “Commencement and short title”.

But this tedious looking clause answers a rather critical point: exactly when can the Government get rid of the requirement for a referendum?

Remember, we are looking for clause 17(7) (on which hangs Schedule 9)

Since that clause is not covered by clause 19(1), it’s covered by clause 19(2).

So it comes into force on such day as a Minister appoints. And different days may be appointed for different purposes.

So what that means is that, the day Royal Assent is given to the EU Withdrawal Bill, a Minister can make provide that Schedule 9 comes into force immediately for the purposes of repealing the parts of the EU Act 2011 that provide for a referendum.

And the Minister can do that before implementing any other bit of (what will then be) the EU Withdrawal Act.

As I understand it @Andrew_Adonis has spotted this point (oddly enough, not a point trumpeted by the Govt, but there if you care to look) and is proposing to do something about it.

It will be interesting to see how he fares: but if he fails, it’s hard to see where this litigation by @BestForBritain can go: the statute on which it relies will have gone before the question it’s concerned about arises.

We saw this way back. Maugham pointed this out.

The EU are most unlikely to just extend A50 or stop the clock
unless there is some mechanism to prevent the UK having MEPs in the EU Parliament
It would cause them too many problems and they are totally fed up with Farage's antics there

The next EP elections are in June 2019

Where are people like Shankar Singham going? If it's to another extreme right wing group, it makes no difference.

That BTW was why I couldn't get too excited about the Tories losing 5 seats in Local Govt elections on Thursday, at least one seat went to an Independent, but they are usually Tory in all but name and are someone who has fallen out with the local party.

Where are people like Shankar Singham going

Deadline for 'deal' likely to be January - 2 months before leaving, ie. any 'meaningful vote' will be between 'deal' and chaos.

Which is, I think, what people on these threads have been saying since forever.

Also, the EU want the UK to finally face the reality of the available choices,
not give the politicians yet more time to faff around in fantasy

The EU is dealing with many other issues, e.g. Trump, refugees
and their politicians are fed up with Brexit and the UK; no more patience

The available Brexit options will not change, even if A50 were extended
The govt might change in that time, if there is a GE

However, whichever party is in office, the govt has to decide which is the least painful Brexit option

somerville 'trusted traveller programme'. Hain is pretty frank on what will happen.

The EU - Barnier, Tusk & co - have repeatedly said that the withdrawal deal must be fixed before October this year

Then, it will have to go for approval to the European Parliament and - unless it is a simple "we quit" deal - go to the 38 Parliaments and Regional Assemblies

If the UK then refuses the deal, noone is sure what will happen
but the EU may not wish to reopen all that, unless any new deal would give it clear advantages.

From Friday (and upthread somewhere)

If there had to be another referendum - would the ability to call it have to be passed by parliament like with the first one? Surely - surely the opposition would not allow a referendum paper that basically asked
would you like to commit:
a) harm to your personal circumstances and the economy
b) catastrophic harm to your personal circumstances and the economy, and see the end of the peace process in NI, lose Gibraltar and eventually the Faulklands
but without couching it in those terms?
No Government and no parliament should ever be allowed to give people who do not know enough to understand the full repercussions of what they are voting for two bad choices - with no option to change their mind.
If that referendum went out then there really would be Nuremberg style trials in the future.
I think if it turned out there had to be a deal/no deal referendum getting it passed, sorting the wording, explaining the real options and having to deal with people's anger - it could bring down the government. At the very least they'd bottle it and just call the whole thing off.
I know governments doing bad things is par for the course - but to actually put 'do you want to destroy the country' to the vote - and then going out and campaigning 'yes' or even accepting a 'yes' vote as the answer - is a step beyond anything they've done so far. (after all they truly believed remain would win) and I wonder if even this lot couldn't bring themselves to do it.

Where are people like Shankar Singham going?

This from the current issue of Private Eye: Given his views, Donnelly [the civil servant who recently asked why we would give up a three-course meal in favour of a packet of crisps] must have been biting his tongue back when he was signing off on the Department for International Trade's advert for a chief trade negotiator to work on "non-EU trade deals as the UK creates trading relationships around the globe" - a post that would be defunct if the UK stayed in the single market. The job eventually went to Crawford Falconer, a member of the shady Legatum Institute, which favours a hard Brexit.

While admiring the ingenuity of the new legal challenge, it does have the potential to backfire massively (ie, no transition period and an absolute cliff edge ).

cat
At least now (trying to find some reason not to totally despair), every time they laud 'technological solutions' to the border, exactly what they mean by that will be clear. Too many people were believing this could involve something palatable to all communities.

The reality of these ideas is that a load of people would be presenting at 'the border' on day one, without having done whatever pre-registering they were meant to do, ready to drive or walk from one part of their country (as they see it) to another. Lots of them would try to do so peacefully, but not all. Cameras would be torn down and border infrastructure destroyed.
And then the British army would be back.

We push on with technological solutions then it's no deal, and a return to civil war. The EU won't have anything to do with agreeing to these type of proposals.
And, sorry for the rant, I know that Westminsterenders do know all this already. But there no-one on my Irish forum to rant with (still sleeping off the rugby victory!)

they not linking it to the leak in the first place
BCF there's no time, is there, and no incentive for the EU to pander to a rogue regime. Chaos is as worrisome as totalitarianism. Having cut the civil service so much there are no staff to operate this.
uk.businessinsider.com/fears-of-discrimination-and-chaos-grow-over-the-uks-plan-to-register-3-million-eu-citizens-ahead-of-brexit-2018-2

According to a report on my FB feed this morning a recent poll shows that 2/3rds of Britain believe that the EU is bullying the UK. FFS.

Cameras would be torn down and border infrastructure destroyed
The similarities with Yugoslavia are startling.

Yes , woman, and the wording 'trusted traveller' is interesting to note. Who would get to decide who is 'trusted' and will that mean some people are denied ability to travel.
People will be fearing that prostestants who want to get across quickly and easily will be allowed to, and themat some Catholics will have to wait in long queues - like the bad old days.
Absolutely stupid and inflammatory wording. Like the whole thing.

EU is bullying the UK. FFS
SISO model of propaganda seems to be working nicely then. I'd add in Ukraine to Yugoslavia.

In Fail and GF so won't do link.

Link it!!! Link to actually news in the fail. Clicks mean they report more on said subject.

Saying you wont link to the fail is stupid.

They make money from traffic. If traffic goes to anti-legatum articles or pro-EU articles what does that do?

DON'T link to anti-immigrant or terrorist sensationalist stories.

Think about how media works.

I don't get why (yet-to-be-invented) technological solutions are still being lauded as the answer. I've cycled from NI to RoI and vice versa several times and there is literally no clue that you have crossed the border until you get to a shop and have to use a different currency or the road signs change to km/miles. Having gantries stacked with cameras and monitoring devices, even if they weren't going to be torn down, does change this situation very, very markedly. The fact that they'd need to be guarded to stop them being vandalised means that the border would become semi-militarised again. It's beyond belief that this is just shrugged off.

Regardless of what the UK does, govt, MPs or lawyers, crunch time is in under 2 weeks,
when the March European Council meets.

They will decide on the draft agreement for Phase 1 - NI being chief stumbling block, May's proposals are farcical.
If the UK does not agree to sign the Phase 1 agreement, then trade talks will NOT begin

In the joint report in December, the UK accepted the backstop option for NI

• the whole of the UK staying in the SM and having a Customs arrangement with the EU.

The draft has simply turned that informal December agreement into a formal legal text.

The UK has not challenged any interpretation of what was agreed:
May has simply reneged on what she agreed in December,
rejected it out of hand, no alternative proposal except idiocy / fantasy, which the govt won't even write down in a text

This is why the EU is so exasperated and why they insist on written texts before proceeding
Invest all that time in getting agreements, then the UK side reneges
Ridiculous

Clicks mean they report more on said subject
Didn't know that! Here we are:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5486019/Think-tank-accused-trying-drive-hard-Brexit-left-turmoil.html

There is a serious danger that the ERG will force the govt to walk away,
if the European Council later this month refuses to let trade talks begin,

Maybe there will be yet another fudge ?
Otherwise, no trade talks and the UK heads for automatic no-deal.
In reality, MPs and lawyers can probably do nothing to avoid this, if the govt is determined.

... Until someone blinks at 2 mins before midnight

• DD thinks it will be the EU, but any proposal from the UK side would be a complicated new deal, whereas the UK could slide into the existing EEA / EFTA fairly quickly, even if that deal needs a lot of fast tweaking