Westministenders: May's Turd Way covered in Donald's Glittery Tickertape from his Parade

[RedToothBrush]

Where next?

Auditions for chief turd polisher to Mrs May are in full action, whilst those who don't believe in the turd, wade about knee deep in their own shit, still searching for that illusive plan for Brexit which doesn't stink to high heaven of crap.

After the dual resignation of Davis and Johnson, amongst the stench there is an air of uncertainity and expectation of all hell breaking loose.

In the last 48 hours we have been told that

1. May is more secure having crushed the brexiteers,
2. May about to be ousted by a no confidence vote, triggering a leadership election,
3. The Tory Party are about to split,
4. Brexiteers are in disarray fighting amongst themselves,
5. We will remain in the EU,
6. We get an EEA deal,
7. We will get no deal,
8. A People's vote is inevitable and
9. There will be a General Election.

Which only serves to merely highlight just how little of a clue ANYONE has about what happens next.

What bothers me now, is that Johnson seems not to have surfaced yet and there are rumours that Gove has gone to ground, whilst Donald Trump is practically on the plane and is stirring the pot praising Johnson.

Instead we seem to have a series of junior ministers and Tory HQ figures quitting in a long drawn out coordinated toy throwing out of the pram exercise, to try and get what hard brexiteers want.

If I had to hazard a guess at the general silence from key figures, I might be tempted to say that someone is going to use Trump's visit to throw a political grenade and actively invite him to endorse them.

That might sound ridiculous given that the public hates Trump, but that loses sight of the fact that the people who will vote for the next leader of the Tory Party are overwhelming authoritarian leaning and likely to be those who like Trump and would be impressed by such a move.

I note this tweet today from the wise Sarah Kendzior:

Sarah Kendzior @sarahkendzior
"There are parallels to past authoritarianism, but what's happening with Trump, in the digital age, is new and transnational. The president's loyalty is not necessarily to a state but to foreign leaders and multinational criminal alliances. The state is just something to sell."

It is clear that others in the parliamentary party will be very alarmed at the prospect. There were Tory MPs who were openly tweeted how please that disgusting Johnson had gone and are no fans of Trump.

May still seems to think that she can get her plan through and approved by the EU in its current form. The White Paper is due on Thursday.

Much speculation is that it will be significant if she fails to produce this on time, as she will have capitulated to the Brexiteers. And this will lead to the EU just giving up on us anyway.

She also announced to the Cabinet today, that preparations for No Deal were to be stepped up significantly.

We still are left wondering who, she is stitching up; the Brexiteers whose heads are currently exploding or the friends she keeps closest to her (friends? or ideological enemies).

The problem is that there just no other viable way forward at the moment, as the country is divided, both Labour and the Conservatives are divided and are more interested in their own future than that of the party and there are far too many ambitious 'celebrity MPs' who want to make their mark. No one gives a shit about ordinary workers or business. Plus there is the divine observation that DGRossetti made at the end of the last thread: The biggest obstacle to Brexit has been Brexiteers

The grab for post-Brexit power shows the whole of Westminister up as the cess pit of self interest it is, with Boris Johnson merely its biggest figure head.

Wait until the GFA officially has its head put on the chopping block awaiting its fate. Perhaps we can flog NI to Donald and get a Brexit Dividend afterall.

I must admit to finding it hard to have a view that is altogether different to this:
James Patrick @J_amesp
There is no way back from all of this. The next seven days simply decide how badly - on a scale of fucked to smouldering crater - it is going to end.

One final predictation, which I am DAMN certain of: Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday are all going to be grim for political watching if you are into democratic values and principles. It will be a 4 day sales pitch for Brand Trump in all its All American Overblown Horror that Brits tend to find utterly distasteful. Expect the red carpet of full of turd glitter to be rolled out for Donald Trump Show. Expect May to embarass herself in her fawning all over him, as if she's star struck. Expect that hideously cringeworthy photo thats totally inevitable.

Politics is going to get worse. It may never get better.

(But yay football gets to cover it all up... Come on England!)

Perhaps JRM could pay his car insurance at the (exorbitant) rate charged by insurers in NI and then ponder why on earth it costs so much?

I see from the calendar of Parliamentary business today that the Home Sec has decided to "pause" the hostile environment process

Perhaps JRM could pay his car insurance at the (exorbitant) rate charged by insurers in NI and then ponder why on earth it costs so much?

I'd guess he doesn't have insurance, but a bond.

Home Sec has decided to "pause" the hostile environment process
They are rolling it out to the entire population.

Bercow has just chastised Raab for realising the white paper to the press to look at (embargoed) before the House so MPs were given access afterwards and were unable to prepare properly for this debate.

The point was raised by Hilary Benn (as head of the Brexit Committee) and by the head of the liason committee (I don't know who, but it was a Tory) and Bercow said that since there was both sides of the house making the same criticism there wasn't a dispute over this.

Raab, was rather sheepish about it, and said he would take it onboard in future.

BBC Watching ....

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-44799469

I notice they use the more precise referendum figures. Which shrinks the headline 52 to "51.9%"

The traditional football chant:
For some reason I thought the chant was going to be who's the bastard in the wig

Home Sec has decided to "pause" the hostile environment process
Pause being the operative word I guess.

David Henig @DavidHenigUK
Ok, here we go with the White Paper thread. Overall impression, kid in the first year of senior school applying to join the sixth form. Trying to understand what that means and not really succeeding. 1/
My favourite paragraph so far below. Our experts should be consulted on the same basis as Member States in line with existing third country relationships. This is nonsense, but based on trying to make an FTA into the EEA. There's a lot of this 2/
On food. The EU already has equivalence arrangements on organic food, so can we have an equivalence arrangement on everything? I would love to know how many hundred thousand pages the EU rulebook is on agriculture... 3/
By the way the EU is welcome to try to keep some Geographical Indications but we're not going to necessarily agree. The EU wouldn't even give you an FTA on this basis. Pure west country farmhouse cheddar cheesecake as we may say 4/
On services this paragraph could mean a standard EU FTA or something greater, we're none the wiser. But we don't mention the EU has existing MFN commitments in trade agreements 5/

Continues...

Remember the DexEu white paper is worse than this; it doesn't understand the existance of the Irish Border.

Sam Coates Times @SamCoatesTimes
Has a single Tory backbench voice spoken in favour of the white paper yet?

If nothing else, we can enjoy the sight of Trump throwing the whole thing a curveball ... anything to keep the chaos going ?

On the plus side, the white paper DOES contain this, which I think all of you will be pleased to see :

Adam Wagner @AdamWagner1
Government's Brexit White Paper (p52) includes a guarantee that the UK "is committed to membership of the European Convention on Human Rights". Will be incendiary to hard core Brexiteers who saw the ECHR as the next in line for UK to leave

Fascinating that this is included in two sections: security cooperation and (less explicitly) "Foreign policy, defence and development"

The implication is that in order to cooperate on security, foreign policy, defence and development (whatever that is meant to mean) the UK needs to assure the EU that it will keep to common human rights standards.

It makes sense when you remember that EU has made signing up to European Convention on Human Rights a pre-requisite of joining the EU, and there is ever closer (with bumps) harmonisation between the European Court of Justice (the EU court) and the European Court of Human Rights

Also makes sense (as @ObiterJ points out) because the Good Friday Agreement includes membership of the European Convention of Human Rights as a central plank and safeguard against public bodies (such as the police and army) acting oppressively.

Neil Crowther @neilmcrowther
And goes way beyond the previous wording of 'no plans to withdraw'. Expect it's deemed a red-line for the European Commission.

Of course, this white paper has no hope of being the final position by government. You can only hope that this part does survive though - it is an acknowledgement of how crucial it is to getting a deal which is progress.

The implication is that in order to cooperate on security, foreign policy, defence and development (whatever that is meant to mean) the UK needs to assure the EU that it will keep to common human rights standards.

As predicted last year. And before the referendum vote.

So we're back to asking Brexiteers what human rights they want to give up ...

Thread continues:

David Henig @DavidHenigUK
By the way could you also invent a specific Mutual Recognition of Professional Qualifications framework for us as we like the EU one but are leaving. Canada doesn't cut it for us... 6/
Not surprisingly we get arrogance in the financial services section. I did like this sentence, we might need higher than global standards you know, something the EU obviously wouldn't dream of... 7/
Ultimate cakeism here. We want autonomy in financial services regulation. Two paragraphs later we want equivalence. So still hanging onto the idea that as we start in the same place we can have equivalence even if we want to change 8/
Apologies this goes over a page but for mobility we're in GATS commitment territory. That's back to an FTA model then 9/
This sounds virtuous but is standard in trade agreements. We also say the same about labour clauses. Which are also standard. 10/
I noticed nothing particularly new or exciting on trade policy, the standard stuff on there being lots of opportunities, but no actual detail on what these might be. It's only been two years we've had to try and work these out. 11/
Despite pre-briefing the US stays in the list of new trade agreements. But CPTPP is added, specifically saying this is compatible with the EU relationship. I'm not 100% sure that's correct 12/
The trade policy section is actually spectacularly bad. Even after two years there's just a mention of mutual recognition of conformity assessment, and no mention of all the extra trade diplomacy work the UK Gov will have to do to replace EU work 13/
If this is the best we can do on services after two years you can't have too much confidence in future UK trade policy to deliver anything in particular 14/
Does the Government have any idea how much legislation the EU passes every year? It doesn't appear to have from this reference... 15/
Another example of trying to suggest we are equally as important as the EU - what to do if there's a disagreement over regulation 16
CONTINUES
twitter.com/DavidHenigUK/status/1017392492310908935
On going thread is here
[[

Bruno Waterfield @BrunoBrussels
Interesting white paper setting out plan for a future “association agreement” with EU after Brexit
Proposals signals weaker red lines, as government was invited to do in the “evolution clause” in EU mandate, which says European side will reconsider their offer if UK moves
^“Common rule book” is a cherry pick that goods, union customs code goods, rules of origin goods and state aid (in all sectors) - it is essentially policed in final instance by ECJ via an arbitration panel
Diverging from EU framework/common rule book would effectively collapse the whole deal^
The goods, common rule book part looks very EEA-like - sources confirm the resemblance, particularly the arbitration panel with the ECJ role This panel will play a surveillance and enforcement role too
While Joint Committee, likely to be senior civil servants, can refer to ECJ by “mutual consent”, the arbitration panel can decide itself When ECJ gives an opinion that interpretation has to be followed common rule book - goods, customs code, state aid (Corbyn will hate this)
Non-regression clauses on environment and social/employment legislation, that is an EU ask that UK previously resisted
The text “as if a combined customs territory” is very significant and strange. Following EU customs code will be policed by the common rule book, indirectly the ECJ. Means under international trade rules (GATT art 24) it is not a legally defined customs union - or not yet
Differential tariff plans, phasing in etc look messy and a soft target for the EU
Rules of origin will be important, esp. for “intermediate” goods that are finished in - cars, 55 per cent requirement Composition of rules of origin - what percentage makes a UK/European car - will be matter for the talks
Service component of goods is covered, UK argues (industry says 40 per cent of value of trade British goods are service contracts) UK says when a good crosses a border, the physical product itself is covered, the contacts around it separately by services. "It is a non-issue”
Financial services. UK wants a treaty for a new super-enhance equivalence arrangement It’s a hit. UK conceding the mutual recognition , so evolving Main ask will be to ditch the 30-day notice period for withdrawing equivalence as creates cliff edge and potentially systemic risk
Paper suggests no preferential migration access for EU nationals - "this will be a matter for the negotiation"
ALSO CONTINUES
twitter.com/BrunoBrussels/status/1017393047053758465
Full thread here which is also on going

In short.
The whole thing is an embarassment.
It ranges from complete gibberish, to empty meaningless phrases which sound nice, to a total lack of understanding of what the EU does, to a total ignorance of trade deals full stop.

Worst thing: No one here will be remotely surprised.

On the plus side.
At least it understands there is a thing called the Irish Border. Unlike DexEu.

No Deal almost starts to look attractive compared to this pile of shit.

Until you start to think about how, if they can't cope with this after 2 years, their ability to organise a piss up in a brewery is exposed and there is fuck all chance of the government surviving the April 2019 food riots as they will have forgotten they needed to stockpile enough for the families of the police and army.

A commitment to joining the euro or the dollar, looks the most likely outcome of Brexit negogitions based on this farce.

www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-future-relationship-between-the-united-kingdom-and-the-european-union?utm_source=e5b3260b-2069-4b57-a5bd-24e9ea02aa88&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate
And this is it. The Brexit Car Crash Paper.

Ian Dunt @IanDunt
It's alright guys, they're going to use artificial intelligence to sort it out. No need to worry.

OMFG.

Grrr annoyed at the preamble already...

A key milestone in its principal mission – to build a country that works for everyone. A country that is stronger, fairer, more united and more outward-looking.

We were the 5 th strongest economy in the world. The E.U. bit was working .It was successive domestic governments who built a country that only worked for some.

Simon Usherwood @Usherwood
A quick first run-through of the White Paper: 1/
Key point is that this is the Chequers statement, enlarged. No obvious signs of adaptation to accommodate ERG (or anyone else). Not surprising, but important to note this up top 2/
As a result, you know the basic balance. Goods FTA, something different for services, close on security and a bunch of other elements 3/
The document is structured primarily as a negotiation brief, rather than as a final state. That means it sets out some goals, but not specific ways to achieve these 4/
This sometimes means that it's more about what's not included than what is. FoM is a good example 5/
WP says FoM will end and bring control back home but also lists many elements of FoM it wishes to retain 6/
Lots of +ve language about mutual interests in cooperating (both generally and specifically), so some effort to think about presentational elements ahead of EU response 7/
Lots more to chew on, but I'll end by noting the fluffed presentation today 8/
Understandable that short run-in times in force here, to limit organisation of oppo, but some overstepping of line today, which isn't going to endear WP to HoC on either side 9/
Given likelihood of CON rebellions, that looks rather needlessly aggravating ERG 10/
Short version: probably enough to get Art.50 moving again, but certainly doesn't put anything much to bed /end

It would have made more sense if Stanley Unwin had dictated it.

Maybe there were right. Maybe no deal is better than a bad deal. Just not a bad deal the EU meter out but one we ask for facepalm

RTB Inital Crib notes:

1. this is a starting position for the future; it doesn't really help us for what happens on 30 March next year.
2. What about the NI backstop in case this attempt to get a deal fails?
3. The ERG are pissed. This won't fly with them. EVER. Which is kind of tough, because legally what they want isn't possible, even if the EU were happy to give cake.
4. There is a total lack of understanding about what the EU does. Still.
5. The EU can not agree to this document. If only because of how much of its contents are simply gibberish.
6. There is still a lack of understand of the scale of the task of Brexit
7. Our civil servants are not up to making ANY trade agreement. They simply lack the skill.
8. Human Rights are in there. And strongly worded in support - under security arrangements - very difficult for the Brexiteers to start to attack this one. Though upholding your rights could still be difficult if you lack the means to do so.
9. We are fucked.

This is a VERY interesting tweet

David Henig @DavidHenigUK
Postscript 1: Thanks @james_clark who noticed this paragraph suggesting the UK would sign up to the backstop with the intention of never using it. If I was the media and MPs I think I would probe this area more than any other

Is this a potential back door to remain? Maybe not for england, wales and scotland but certainly for NI. That means a border in the Irish Sea. Which equals... well if the government are preoccupied with the food riots here, then they are not going to be listening a great deal to the DUP's screams.

Michel Barnier @MichelBarnier
We will now analyse the #Brexit White Paper w/ Member States & EP, in light of #EUCO guidelines. EU offer = ambitious FTA + effective cooperation on wide range of issues, including a strong security partnership. Looking forward to negotiations with the #UK next week.

David Henig @DavidHenigUK
The EU is rightly treating this proposal as part of FTA negotiations and assuming the backstop is what needs to be negotiated. Nothing in the white paper changes this fact.

In other words; the backstop is the thing that matters. The government are trying to downplay it as unimportant as it won't be used. Why? Because they really believe that, or because its a smoke screen to soften a No Deal in some way or another?

In reference to the clause about the backstop never being used:

JPCampbellBiz @JP_Biz
This was more or less described by David Davis at a committee hearing some months ago. The plan, such as it was, was to have such a detailed & comprehensive political declaration by March that the backstop would be rendered irrelevant by comparison.

David Henig @DavidHenigUK
This is where I stop being polite... the plan that a declaration based on this white paper could make the Northern Ireland backstop irrelevant is possibly the most stupid one I have heard in a long time - and I've heard many stupid plans recently...

It sounds like Davis at least, really thought that the backstop wasn't important. Thats ridiculous. Unless you intend to rip up the GFA. Or deliberately use the backstop to remain. Or as a mechanism to pull NI out of the union. Or your a dumb fuck.

In Davis's case, its the last.

It is ignoring the will of the people in Scotland as well.

(Average Brexiteer)

"You say that like it's a problem."