Westministenders: The One Where We Finally Get A Leadership Challenge?

[RedToothBrush]

Tick tick tick.

What do we think?

Yes? No?

Another week of wtf-ing at British politics.

Only if Lab were in power, the Tories could never agree on Norway - EFTA deal, there are at least 80 Con MPs that would be dead against it, so they'd need a big majority.

All that is certain is that her deal leaves us all blind to the final trading relationship.

I want the french to make more fishing demands and the Spanish to hold firm on Gib' hopefully others will chip in with their concerns, add in DUP, SNP and Lab and this deal will be sunk.

The French have relaxed their fishing demands. The Spanish concern was, I think, wording changed so that the 'ownership' of Gibraltar is still open to future discussion (not to be discussed now).

Ian Dunt
‏*@IanDunt*

Home Office refuses openDemocracy’s request for information about investigation into Aaron Banks – saying it "would impede the future formulation of government policy"

www.opendemocracy.net/uk/brexitinc/peter-geoghegan-and-jenna-corderoy/theresa-may-accused-of-major-cover-up-over-brexit-do

This is normal.

twitter.com/IanDunt/status/1065288604640034816

I could have understood if they'd said this information could impede an ongoing criminal investigation

But to say it would would impede the future formulation of government policy ?

Highly

"Impeding the future formulation of government policy" is a standard reason not to disclose information. (The argument is that if policy makers think that all deliberations will be made public in the future, they won't be as candid about pros and cons, or even floating options for consideration)

There's a bit of the Freedom of Information Act which specifically protects information related to the formulation and development of government policy. It's subject to a public interest test.
There's other exemptions for law enforcement and other things.

Beth Rigby
@BethRigby
NEW: May just said she's returning to Brussels on Saturday for a further meeting with Juncker

Thanks. That's interesting. If she gets tweaks to words that suit the grumpy knickers bunch in Cabinet they might all come out for WA more loudly.

"Freedom of Information" - but not as we know it, Jim

The EU would be happy to tweak the Political Declaration - i.e. the bit about future trade deals - if May wants to keep more options open

They probably also don't mind including some words about magic tech solutions, because that tech has to convince the arbitration panel to the same standard as more plausible options,
i.e. it's a meaningless sop to "ERG-lite" members like Gove

Looking at that WA more closely, the EU have leveraged in all the SM conditions that the UK has to keep, for the CU.
There are about 60 pages of it

So, The WA actually has many similarities to Norway - which is in the Single Market - minus FOM and plus "frictionless" trade for food products

May is the one who's so madly against FOM - the ERG aren't;
Corbyn seems against - maybe jas can say about that
The EU certainly like FOM

So, if May & Corbyn retire within the next couple of years, FOM could be brought back into the deal, during negotiations in the transition period.

NS Article

Quite funny bit about bumping into the ERG at the HoC, then gets very interesting.

I must say that imo the SNP are the only party that have been consistently sensible - and Remainy ! -
and are the only party to have impressed me during this horrid Brexit saga

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/nov/21/britain-deserves-better-brexit-may-peoples-vote

From a Scottish perspective, one thing above all else is clear amid the Brexit chaos – that is, the cost to Scotland of not being independent.

Independent Ireland has had nothing but support from its EU counterparts; Scotland has been treated with nothing but contempt by the UK government.

BCF I ve given up on Corbyn, i don't know what he stands for or wants, i suspect neither does he.

May as Labour party leader would do a better job.

May's stubborn, blinkered determination is sort of admirable but going the wrong direction. Having an opposition with as much conviction to remain in would have been great. Expressions like mule and ass come to mind (different attributes).

Vote Leave loses legal challenge over Brexit spending breach

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/21/vote-leave-loses-legal-challenge-over-brexit-spending-breach

Judicial review dismisses attempt to have Electoral Commission ruling thrown out
...
Fronted by Boris Johnson and Michael Gove,
Vote Leave was accused of submitting incomplete and inaccurate spending returns,
and of channelling donations it had received to the smaller BeLeave group which it worked with “under a common plan”,
meaning its true spending was £450,000 over the £7m limit.

Apart from knowing this, will it actually affect anything as A50 is on it's way and the mad bunnies are (out of ) in control.
Prison, barring from office, anything?

I get the feeling (no reason just my gut tells me so) that her meeting on Saturday with Junker is less about her negotiating from a position favoured by the brexiteers (they need us more than we need we need them) but more that 'they' are becoming less patient of our abhorrent and ineffectual handling of the situation.
The real mess is only just beginning, as the individual nations start to lose all respect and good will toward us.
I'm a firm remainer but it gives me zero pleasure to see the way it's heading.
I've a feeling the deal currently on the table is going to seem a hopeless distant memory soon, regardless of the HofC vote.

I think you are right Drivinmecrazy. The reporter on Sky news tonight said that Merkel has been muttering about not bothering to turn up at the summit on Sunday which she had envisaged as a "signing exercise" rather than a negotiation. But that she wasn't going to bother if the negotiation is at the stage where bits of paper are still flying about.

A tiny bit of good news in that the Criminal prosecution service has notified Boris Johnson of proceedings for misfeasance or misconduct in public office.

This one is a private prosecution . Based on section 6(1) of the Prosecution of Offences Act 1985. The barristers instructed are apparently from Church Court Chambers: Mr Lewis Power QC, Colin Witcher and Anthony Eskander.

The case relies on statements made by Boris Johnson in his capacity as an MP apparently and as Mayor of London. So it's statements prior to and following the Referendum concerning the cost of Membership.

The case Relies on the claim that the UK ‘sends £350 million a week to the EU’ was knowingly false and that Boris endorsed the statements with the intention of persuading the British Public to vote Leave.

www.crowdfunder.co.uk/brexitjusticeprosecution/updates/79938#start

On the one hand Boris's star seems on the descent anyway. However it does get publicity out there to persistent Leave trumpeters that at least one of the pillars of their vote was entirely false. It's one step towards explaining that 0.7% of GDP was money well spent.

More information is here. I know it's ' only' Boris but I do think any attempt to try and row back the tide of deceitful politicians lying as a default position is a good initiative . Amber Rudd for example seemed to make a very quick comeback after her deceits blaming her briefing team.

Interesting that the team intended to prosecute other lying Leave and Remain politicians but that the alleged evidence against Boris seemed to be the weightiest.

www.crowdfunder.co.uk/brexitjusticeprosecution

An interesting article by Jo Maugham in what could happen after the A50 revocation court case.

There are three possibilities. The Court of Justice might say we’re stuck with the decision parliament made in March 2017 to leave the EU: Article 50 is not reversible. Or it might say parliament can reverse its decision to leave up until the date of our departure if the European Council agrees (Donald Tusk has indicated the EU would be prepared to give this consent). Or it might say we can revoke without the need for consent—the ideal outcome for those who believe that the best place to take decisions about the United Kingdom’s future is in our parliament.
And MPs really need to know. “Life,” as HL Mencken aptly put it, “is a constant oscillation between the sharp horns of dilemmas.” All parliamentarians must weigh the difficult choices before them. If Article 50 cannot be reversed, and Remain is off the table, then MPs, even those who believe May’s deal to be the lovechild of false promises and ugly xenophobia, may find themselves compelled to support it.
If, on the other hand, we can cancel the Article 50 notification, then even Leave-supporting MPs who believe May’s deal to be worse than Remaining might throw their weight behind a second referendum. The ERG’s unloved attempt to unseat the prime minister is evidence how thin is parliamentary support for no deal.

www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/mps-must-know-is-article-50-revocable

If Johnson gets a well deserved and expensive bit of legal trouble - even if it comes to nothing- it will be slightly worth it.
Fucker needs to take the consequences for the first time in his charmed life.

How I would love to see Johnson convicted. Sadly I think it is unlikely to happen. Think the money would be better spent supporting Maugham and the various legal initiatives he's been involved with and which already have broad support from the legal community.

I'm worried about the press response to the Article 50 case though. Logically and obviously there will be either a unilateral or consensual right to withdraw.

Either way the spin will be 'look the ECJ wants us to withdraw, they need us more than we need them' blah blah.

Ironically it would be better if the ECJ said we can't withdraw the notice .. then the reactionary people's response would be- we're British don't tell us what to do -we can withdraw if we want to.

Sadly the 'baying mob' of diehard leavers need to be satisfied that the UK leaves. If we don't they will be forever a thorn in the side.
As there are disagreements in the EU and much of Europe has issues that need sorting out, they cannot change radically enough to satisfy UK leavers who would do anything to cause as much friction as possible.
Thus to me, as much as I think it is a really bad idea, the UK must leave.
Whether 6 months or a year 'in the cold' gets people wanting to be back in is questionable but having seen the well worked out plans put forward by (nobody) to even get a glimpse of a sunny upland it will certainly focus minds a bit.
The UK simply doesn't have physical or 'mental' resources to both compensate for the vast amount of damage that is already done and then make it better than what we had, which was promised by some.
You don't go trekking in the mountains by chopping one leg off just before you start. You need rehab before putting your boots on.