Westministenders: Plan B on the back of a Contempt Envelope

[RedToothBrush]

You could say its been an eventful day in BrexitWorld!

1. The Advocate General's opinion (non-binding) is that a50 CAN be revocated unilaterally provided its in good faith (not done merely to extend the a50 period and is a settled commitment to stay in the EU. This is NOT the ECJ verdict. This is still due. The ECJ does occasionally disagree with the Advocate General, but this is rare. This is important and will affect how MPs view how they will vote next week in the Withdrawal Agreement vote.

2. IF the ECJ rule in this way it does not rule out the EU appealing the decision.

The logic of the AG argument largely centres on the point that if the UK is sovereign then it can unilaterally withdraw from international treaties so it must also be allowed to revoke that decision otherwise it's not sovereign. Its hard to see how the ECJ will be able to go against that opinion.

Politically that could make an appeal difficult for the EU. However there is also much to say the EU WILL appeal though, if only because of concerns about how the a50 process could be abused by other countries such as Poland or Hungary to effectively renegotiate their status in the block. This possibility should not be forgotten. The 'good faith' argument is a legal minefield given the UK's behaviour in the last two years, if someone did want to challenge an ECJ unilateral ruling.

3. The government lost two votes regarding contempt of parliament and not releasing the full legal advice on Brexit.

The first vote was for a government amendment which they lost by 4 votes - which has been claimed is down to the DUP voting with Labour instead of the government. The result was 311 to 307 votes.

The second vote was for the actual contempt motion itself. Again the government lost. The result was 311 to 293 - or 18 votes. So some Tory MPs abstained on this vote.

This marks the point where the government is officially a minority government and May no longer has a majority.

4. Dominic Grieve tabled a motion (hereby named Grieve III), which was essentially a re issuing of Grieve II - the motion that he had proposed previously, but had been talked out of my May, only for her to burn him shortly afterwards.

This motion was supported by the regular Remain Rebels as well a bunch of known (and not insignificant) May Loyalists.

The effect of the amendment is thought to create a situation where 'Accidental' No Deal is no longer a default position. Instead if no deal is reached, it throws power back to the HoC to advice the government what steps they should now take.

It does not rule out the possibility of No Deal. It is still possible. Its just a lot less likely to. Brexiteers are arguing that the vote is not legally binding (Technically its not and they are correct). This seems highly unlikely in practice (politically not an option - the vote is politically binding, if not legally) even if that is the case. See the referendum for legally v politicially binding and how that has worked out. But there is room for a mess here too.

There is certainly no majority for No Deal in the HoC.

Grieve III was won by 22 votes (321 to 299). Thus making this a SIGNIFICANT vote in more than one respect.

5. Prior to the Grieve III vote, there were rumours that May was set to lose Tuesday's WA vote by up to as much as 400 votes.

There was a lot of talk that the government were prepared to lose the vote, with a view to representing the deal at a later stage. The vote next week was about minimising the size of the defeat.

However this relied on May being in full control of the options for Plan B. Grieve III limits this somewhat and puts power in the hands of parliament. (Parliament has taken back control you see).

It does not direct the government as such but it makes it much more likely that Plan B will have to be Nick Boles suggestion for Norway, rather than May's version of Plan B and a simple re-presentation of her deal.

Of course, this is over simplified as the EU and the EEA ALSO would have to go for the Nick Boles plan. The suggestion is that Norway WOULD agree to it, PROVIDED we were fully committed to it for the long term. But its not just down to Norway.

6. All this might well focus minds ahead of next week's vote. There are now three forces at work a) Brexiteers fearing that the likelihood of remain or a soft brexit have gone up, thus potentially being more inclined to support May. (This doesn't appear to be happening) b) The overall chances of No Deal decreasing, thus soft leavers being happier to pursue the opportunity for a soft Brexit (Norway deal) rather than supporting May's deal - at least at this stage. c) The hope of remaining due to the AG verdict combined with Grieve III encouraging remainers to not back May's Deal as they no longer fear the possibility of Accidental No Deal.

It has been suggested that its possible that the government allowed themselves to be defeated on the contempt motion in order to woo the ERG. This seems a bit of a stretch, as May has repeatedly proved that she isn't this kind of genius and Cox would have to have agreed to be the sacrifical lamb for that.

7. The contempt of parliament motion now passes to the Parliamentary Privilege Committee to decide what punishment will be levelled on the government and Cox in particular. It is worth noting that at present, there are 7 on the committee; 3 Cons, 3 Lab and 1 SNP. Which you would suspect does not bode well for government.

8. There is STILL some arguement over which version of the legal advice the government will publish as a result of the contempt vote, and when it will publish it. In theory there could be another contempt vote if it fails to act in a way that the house is satisfied with.

9. The government are pretty pissed off at the Humble Address motions, and are now seeking to find ways to limit them.

10. There is some suggestion that something has happened that opens the door for the US to leave NATO. This would be hugely significant to Brexit. Keep your eyes on this.

11. When Cox spoke in the commons earlier this week, he made the point that Brexit means we are bound by the GFA to remain in the ECHR. And the ECHR also binds us to the GFA. Again significant, when talking about wanting to force a situation where we have Accidental No Deal, given the strength of feeling about wanting to leave the ECHR. If the Accidental No Deal door is closed, then this might also change ERG opinions as their motivition to have a hard Brexit is also reduced.

And of course the backstop is, to all intents and purposes, the GFA. It will be interesting to see how the backstop is framed in the full legal advice.

12. Going back to point 1, there are still obstacles to remaining. May and the Conservatives are HIGHLY unlikely to want to revoke because of the damage to the party.

There is some talk about who has the power to revoke; parliament or the PM. The overall problem is that the PM does not have the power to overturn Acts relating to Brexit which have been passed by the HoC, although the original a50 vote passed the power to enact a50 to the PM from the house - and presumably the reverse would also be true if the PM has the power of a50.

Thus to revoke - IF the ECJ say we can - it has to be passed by parliament. At this stage there is no parliamentary majority to remain. This, of course, could change. It depends on what the alternatives are - arguably the likilhood of remaining is perhaps higher if accidental brexit is possible and the only alternative. Otherwise a soft exit would seem more logical.

13. Corbyn's speech in the commons in response to May's presenting the Withdrawal Agreement sounds remarkably like continuity remain, to an extent that he has not previously gone.

Conclusion:
Overall, Grieve III is massively positive, purely from the point of view of avoiding No Deal.

Next week STILL gives the opportunity for MORE amendments which could create enormous problems though. The potential to end up in a situation with amendments which are positions which are diametrically opposed to each other or to the EU or the legal situation are huge. This would mark something of a crisis in its own right.

Its difficult to see where May goes from here. Her ability to force her deal though, rested on the leverage of the fear of No Deal / being in complete control of what Plan B was. Grieve III kills a lot of that, and combined with the preliminary opinion on revocation. Her only alternative is to go for Norway - like a lot of her Cabinet have already pushed for, but this would be a massive u-turn for her. The Times were speculating this morning that she will walk next week. But we've been here so many times before.

I suspect other posters and commentators will read all this differently to me (will be interesting to see how others view it) but this is my best shot at trying to make some sense of it all. I think the biggest bone of contention will be the balance of probability of the options out there.

PS: DO NOT forget the EU's own self interest which is consistently forgotten in the UK coverage and debate of the subject.The EU have no obligation to do a Norway deal. Nor to extend a50 if they do not see it being in their own interests to do so.

I wouldn't get hopes up too much just yet, but today does feel like a potential turning point. We have to get through next week though. I don't rule out anything at this point. All options are still possible and I wouldn't like to put money on anything. But a soft brexit or remaining are more tangible than they were at 7am this morning imho.

Feel free to take this all apart with your own analysis!

1TisILeClerc

have said on previous incarnations of this thread that I originally voted Remain, and given the situation in say July 2016 would do so again. Having witnessed the horrendous crap from Westminster on both sides and having read some of the other less 'on topic' discussions I would now vote Leave in some form.

I feel relieved I found someone who supports Remain that agrees with me on this! I found the going back and forth to Brussels of Cameron before the referendum cringey. That coupled with all the years of the UK not playing by the rules and asking for preferential treatment and opt-outs, made me consider at some point before the referendum whether I should vote Leave. My reasoning being, it's unfair to carry on being so disruptive to the rest of the EU. I thought, maybe it'd be more honest to leave rather than drag the lot of them down?
I did vote Remain and would so again but like in 2016, I just don't know what to wish for. There's no end in sight to the UK being a complete pain in the arse whether the direction is to stay or to leave! I can totally see why Norway doesn't want us upsetting the equilibrium of the EFTA!

Brexit happened (in part) because suddenly white van man’s wages (less oppressed than the poor female nurses) became affected by immigration.

I don't know why people keep saying this. In my experience, when we needed an extension and got quoted from different builders, the Eastern Europeans were not cheaper by any means! Other quotes we got for plumbing and tiling from Eastern Europeans again were not cheaper than by English-born builders.
Another thing I've noticed over the years, most of the delivery men that work at the weekend are Eastern Europeans. I do think they work really hard and are usually very clean and polite.

I think the EU position will harden further at 'ground' level when the general public of the EU realise that their taxes will have gone up by around £400 or more per person BECAUSE of the UK.
OK their respective governments may not show it as such but costs have been incurred.
Imagine the outrage in the UK if the UK gov announced that it was slapping an extra £400 in tax on all UK taxpayers to give to Greece.
Loletta
Although May's 'WA deal' is pretty crap it is only a starting point and IF (that is a massive IF) the UK signed up and then got some grown ups to actually negotiate properly I am pretty sure many aspects could be resolved amicably. Trouble is there are no 'grown ups' in Westminster and they have spent the last 2 1/2 years being as unpleasant as possible.
If you were in a cage with a lion, you would try and make friends, not poke it with a stick!

Because of one extension? Wow best bow down to your extensive knowledge.

No one is saying EU and other immigrant workers don’t work hard or contribute. To the contrary they are usually excellent workers and colleagues.

But to think a huge influx of labour in some sectors doesn’t hold down pay is very naive. Supply and demand capitalism tells us, no? Isn’t low supply of specific skills why we’re told to accept footballers and merchant bankers being paid millions while we pay our nurses, soldiers and teachers f all?

Although May's 'WA deal' is pretty crap it is only a starting point and IF (that is a massive IF) the UK signed up and then got some grown ups to actually negotiate properly I am pretty sure many aspects could be resolved amicably. Trouble is there are no 'grown ups' in Westminster and they have spent the last 2 1/2 years being as unpleasant as possible.

Again agree 100% with you. The problem is not so much the WA but the fact we have a bunch of numpties in charge of the country who can't agree with each other or act as grown ups

I see the news is dominated by thousands upon thousands of people on the streets of London standing up for Brexit ...... no, wait a minute....it isn't. Because there aren't thousands and thousands of people. Just some twats with Tommy Dickface.

That march may be peaceful, but it is certainly nasty

Even the name of the march:
Not e.g. "Hooray for Brexit" but the angry paranoid "Stop Brexit Betrayal" march with its anger at "traitors"

Even those of us who despise what May has done as PM and Home Sec before that,
would be disgusted & alarmed at this:

Sam Blewett@BlewettSam

Here at the ‘Brexit betrayal’ march is a man holding a noose.
He gave his name as Laukan Creasey, from Stevenage. I asked why he was carrying it. ‘
That’s what the traitor May deserves.
That’s what treasonous people get,’ he said.

I agree there are very few grown-up politicians at Westminster at the moment, but I don't see how a significantly better deal could be negotiated given a) red lines on the freedom of movement and b) the Irish border. I'd be really interested to hear suggestions on this from anyone who disagrees.

I agree the there’s no better deal available. People want the benefits of being in the EU without paying the price. It’s not realistic at all. There is no doubt we will be worse off outside the EU - even JRM says no benefit to us for 50 years. We cannot go back to pre-EU trading days because the world works differently now.

Are there any numbers about the size of the crowd? Most reputable news outlets are focusing on the counter protest.

Of none reputable outlets- the daily star said there had been a clash between the two groups - but I've not seen anything about it anywhere else.
Also it is reporting a gilet jaune has had their hand blown off by a grenade. There is a video - I declined to watch it.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/dec/09/mrs-may-has-no-choice-but-to-charge-into-valley-parliamentary-hell

It is conceivable that she could declare that she has tried her best, express regret that parliament can’t agree, and announce that she is leaving the stage to let someone else see if they can do any better.

That’s not impossible, but quitting in that fashion would be out of character.

Walking away from messes of their own creation is what juvenile males like David Cameron and Boris Johnson do.

Whatever transpires on Tuesday, it is not an absolute given that she will have to quit.
Nor is there evidence that this is what voters will expect of her

Do you think that march is mainly men?

But to think a huge influx of labour in some sectors doesn’t hold down pay is very naive. Supply and demand capitalism tells us, no? Isn’t low supply of specific skills why we’re told to accept footballers and merchant bankers being paid millions while we pay our nurses, soldiers and teachers f all?

To keep claiming that migrants are holding down pay in the face of existing evidence with no factual support at all - that is naive.

There are many factors that impacted pay over the last 20 years - globalisation, technology, trade changes, and as I keep saying, the financial crisis - you’re not acknowledging these.

Public sector pay in this country (as opposed to say France) has long been impacted by the Thatcherite ideology of the small state and paying public workers as little as you can get away with.

Immigrant nurses in the NHS fill the shortfall of trained British nurses. They’re there to fill the gaps.

Press freedom threatened: Loughinisland massacre

OT, but those in charge in NI are continuing to coverup old atroctities, to protect the guilty

• and to punish journalists for uncovering them

Some things don't change in NI

https://www.theguardian.com/media/commentisfree/2018/dec/09/film-investigating-loughinisland-massacre-deserves-a-wider-audience

Two journalists, who acted in the public interest by shining light on a dark and evil deed, are facing criminal charges
while men guilty of a multiple murder walk free, just as they have done for 24 years.

A police force colluded with murderers to ensure that justice was not done.

Immigration has only a small effect on pay & jobs in the UK.

The main factors are automation - which has cut millions of previously good secure jobs -

and globalisation, competing with low wage economies, not just low skilled jobs either:

China & India each have 79 million graduates.
India had 2.6 million new STEM graduates alone last year.

Of course too, UK policies of an overblown financial sector and rewarding the rich mean that
average wages for ordinary workers are lower in real terms than before the financial crash

• only Greece has seen similar effects on wages, which gives an indication just how badly the UK has been run

Immigrants have been welcomed for decades in Germany, e.g. in STEM, my area of interest

My department in Germany (huge tech firm) has so many foreign workers that working language in many groups is English, not German.
We all have good pay, with great conditions, sick pay, holiday, no unpaid overtime or presenteeism etc

That march may be peaceful, but it is certainly nasty ... Even the name of the march: Not e.g. "Hooray for Brexit" but the angry paranoid "Stop Brexit Betrayal" march with its anger at "traitors" ... Even those of us who despise what May has done as PM and Home Sec before that, would be disgusted & alarmed at this:

Sorry, but Ms. May was more than happy when the Daily Mail was on her side and printing headlines about "Enemies of the People" about judges, and "Traitors" for people using their democratic freedoms. She should have remembered the Fairy Story about the evil Queen, and red hot shoes.

Imagine if that hatred were directed at Johnson, Farage and Davies - you know the men who really betrayed Brexit ? I wonder how much illegally spent cash they will have to spend to avoid Google returning
"Farage, Johnson and Davies" when the question "Who betrayed Brexit" is entered ....

Yep, see my post @ 14.24 above.

The average Leave voter simply cannot apparently grasp the impact of globalisation and technology. It’s much easier to blame foreigners.

btw, if you look at how wages in Poland & other E European cointries have rocketed,
it's obvious that their mass immigration was only ever going to be a temporary issue, while their economies caught up to nearer the EU average.

Now of course the major drop in value of the pound, plus the hostility many immigrants and their families experience,
EE immigration has plummeted
..... to be replaced by non-EU immigration from much lower-wages countries

Haircut alert

Haircut and weight loss doesn't stop him being a twat.

Yes but why do they want to come here? To do the jobs UK workers won’t / don’t want / can’t do. And they come only when UK wages are better than their own countries wages.

and while they come employers can hold down wages.

I’m not saying it’s their fault FFS. But their presence enables this practice of low pay to continue.

The photos on @sebastianepayne twitter feed of the Brexit betrayal March are awful (he's an FT journalist)

People bringing homemade gallows? Wtf.

Yes but why do they want to come here? To do the jobs UK workers won’t / don’t want / can’t do. And they come only when UK wages are better than their own countries wages.

My Irish relations were invited in the 1960s along with the Windrush generation to do work British people would not do for the wages and conditions employers were offering.

Why are so few NHS staff offered trained here, why are the UK brain draining medical staff and exploiting people from other nations leaving them deprived?

Why are Employment contracts offering little dignity for the WC, imho worse working conditions than twenty years ago in some ways?

I note Ed Milliband has given up the zero hours hobby horse for NeoLib identity politics instead.

My sister in law's family were badly hit by the 2008 crash. Her husband works in trades which bore a huge lot of the brunt of it.

Fortunately as a family we were between us able to offer support to get them through it; without that they would have lost their (and their children's) home and potentially seen the breakdown of their marriage. I've no doubt there were many, many, families in the same boat and worse.

The simple fact was that there was less work to go round, which invariably means worse conditions for workers as there are more people wanting to do fewer jobs. I can see (but don't agree with) where the thinking that if there were fewer immigrants - particularly in lower paid, lower skilled areas of work - there would be more opportunities to work.

It's hard to look at the bigger picture when you're struggling to feed and clothe two teenage girls and don't know where the money is coming from for the mortgage this month.

I don't know what the solution is - better protection for all workers? Higher benefits for short term unemployment? Even some sort of unemployment insurance scheme that provides enough to live off for a period?

But something needs to be done to stop those in lower paid lower skilled jobs feeling at threat from immigration, whether that threat is real or perceived.