Westminstenders: The English Gentleman and Martial Law

[RedToothBrush]

Ahead of Tuesday's vote, let's have a quick look at the week's developments.

The Cooper-Boles Amendment seems to be in trouble. The amendment is designed to force government to extend A50 if the WA fails to pass parliament in order to prevent No Deal.

It's in trouble in several ways.

After lots of loud noises from Labour about supporting it, they have made no formal move to. Thus there is no requirement for Labour MPs to vote for it. The noise was just for Remain ears whilst trying to keep leavers on board.

The amendment is struggling for numbers; many of the former Labour MPs are extremely unreliable at votes and haven't turned up even for important ones of late. In addition to this, Tory rebels are backing away from it out of fear from a backlash from their grassroots who believe they are trying to stop Brexit. There was talk of up to 20 ministers resigning to back it, including Amber Rudd, yet as Sunday has dawned there's no sign yet and its usually the day for such political statements. Though there is time yet.

And finally there is the prospect of Murrison II. Now also backed by 1922 heavyweights Graham Brady and Damien Green this seeks to remove the backstop from the WA on our side.

Except the EU has said that this would not be the WA if it does not contain the backstop. And they would not ratify it.

Yet rumours are May is close to a majority to get the WA through with Murrison II.

There has been much speculation over what would happen to the Irish border in a no deal with Farage sticking his oar in saying "nothing". Whilst Barnier states that there would, but the Irish government are avoiding the subject. We have now had the comment that it would mean the return of Irish soldiers to the border...

We could have a looming situation where parliament passes Murrison II AND Cooper-Boles. But Cooper-Boles deemed invalid cos the WA has been passed by Parliament but in effect isn't worth the paper (or goat skin) it's written on. Thus no deal could still happen by 'accident'.

There's been talk of Murrison II not being picked by Bercow, and how this would provoke a walkout by government. It seems that since he's done it once it would be difficult to ignore.

And whilst all this is going on we now have the mainstream newspapers saying that there are plans for martial law, 'forward purchasing' of food, fuel and ammunition. Talk of travel bans and property seizure. And just general plans for the collapse of free society and the supply of basic essentials for continuous of life. And many ERG MPs are tweeting things which seem to be rather fond and happy with the idea.

Do not forget: What happens when May is gone? Who replaces her, and what are their views on liberal society and freedom. Cos that all looks rather 'troubling' in an authoritarian state kind of way. What power would they wield?

Just what are we sleep walking into?

The only good thing a GE might do now, is jump ahead of any deselection machinations and weaken the Brexiteer vote. After all, where could a dedicated Brexiteer place his cross in a seat where the incumbent looks a bit Remainery, but the opposing MP is a hard line Brexiteer ?

There's also the crossover effect. And the new voter effect.

My lib dem candidate is a leaver

?

My Labour MP is a remainer but has Momentum snapping at his heels in a self destructive manner (thanks Jezza)

Dear god, not another GE.

As for who to vote for: I think self-ID is fucking bollocks (sometimes literally), but as all the main parties are apparently singing from the same hymn sheet, I'm not going to vote based on it. Brexit is my priority issue and, as long as Labour party policy remains the incoherent fence-sitting dog's dinner that it has been, my vote will be going to the LibDems.

I will be voting 'None'. Self-serving MPs will not be getting my vote, they will not compromise and find a deal.

I will be voting 'None'.

i.e. for Brexit.

My Tory MP has a 24k majority

Not great at links but if they're whipping for the Brady amendment, what does that mean?

www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2019/01/here-s-why-jeremy-corbyn-s-ambiguity-brexit-actually-public-s-best

Remain and Leave commentators, Tories and Labour Blairites alike, are at least agreed upon one thing: Jeremy Corbyn’s reluctance to settle on a Brexit policy is a failure of leadership, resulting in a Labour policy that is chaotic, unclear or even suspiciously motivated. From party leaders like Vince Cable to newspaper commentators like Polly Tonybee and aggressive TV hosts like Andrew Marr, everyone is pushing the shadow cabinet to come out one way or the other (even Corbyn’s most vocal supporters).

But there is a compelling reason for Corbyn to resist being forced either way on Brexit that is bigger and more important than internal party divisions. The current position – the same since the party conference in September – is the only position that is fair to the voting public. As things stand, it is only Corbyn’s resistance of impatient demands from all sides that is keeping the possibility of a fair and reasonable next general election alive.

If Corbyn backs a second referendum before a general election, that will ensure that the election – the most important in recent political history – is based only on Brexit. The Labour leader cannot rule out a second referendum without speaking to Europe: doing so would be tantamount to May’s own “my deal or no deal”. Thus, he could only end the ambiguity by promising one. That would turn a vital choice between ongoing Tory austerity and a new political manifesto for a progressive future into another round of Leave vs Remain.

(contd).

Ah it means this, so May goes to Brussels, stamps her foot, demands the backstop is removed/changed/something else.

Brussels says, 'we'll tell you again, non, nein, the withdrawal agreement is closed'

Then what? Hell? Handbasket? 'Those awful Europeans wouldn't budge, it's their fault, they made us no deal?'

Fuck me

Not sure if this has been posted - could fall into No Deal

JRM already saying apparently he's not voting for it.

So assuming the Brady bunch deal leads to May being told to dust her broom, is that setting the stage for a GE based on "nasty EU, let's show them with an election" ?

Oh no DG, an election? You think?

Latest pmk ever.
Taking some comfort in like-minded people, but now f*cking scared and seriously depressed about the state we're in and will be. Debating whether to suggest my anxious not very well parents stock up on a few extra things...

There's snow this am colouring could you take them or suggest a snow forward buying shop?

I've tried with my mum colouring

She won't listen.

...and my siblings don't vote and would laugh at me.

I suspect that the shadow cabinet will never be forgiven for their moral and political cowardice if this goes the way it's now likely to.

Cooper and Starmer are hamstrung by party rules into having Corbyn in charge pro tem - they know what they need to do after tomorrow though.

Oh no DG, an election? You think?

Personally, no (and there's radio silence on the internet). I was speculating on the PP who said there were "rumours" of a GE being announced tomorrow or Thursday.

Being forensic about things, it's niggling (and it's always niggled) as to why Theresa May called the GE when she did. Not that she called it, but that she called it at that point in time - June 2017. We've all been happy to accept the idea that she was too cocky, and threw away the Tory lead in an ill-advised gamble to secure a bigger majority. However, I'm wondering if that's not a bit too simplistic, and over-using the trope of her being a bit crap ay everything.

Is there any significance at all in there having been that (pointless) election in 2017 ???

A GE will allow an extension to A50 timetable. Room to breathe. But I don’t know on what basis it can be called due to FTPA.

Anyone know?

Rosetti I always thought she did it because, although her position ended up being weaker than she expected, she knew no one would trust Corbyn in a time of financial crisis + she had negotiated so far (back when ppl believed she had been doing something with the time). At the time I thought it was so they could plough on without need for another one for as long as possible - further coup with false image of democracy.

Alex Wickham @alexwickham
Everyone turning on each other

Govt sources livid with Brady for blowing up his own amendment by saying govt didn’t have to reopen WA

ERG furious with No10 for letting them think May would commit to reopening WA

Brexiters saying Rees-Mogg should not have killed Brady amdt yet

Tomorrow is going to be fun

A GE will allow an extension to A50 timetable. Room to breathe.

Not sure if that's a given. It's been suggested, and a GE has been cited as one of the situations in which A50 could be extended. However, bear in mind there are competing pressures, and there might be some reluctance from some EU members to effectively "reward" the UK for being such an arsehole.

I would hope a GE would not be called before an A50 extension is possible. However for that to happen, May would have to break character and ask for it before deciding on a GE. Which leads to the question what would happen if the answer was "no" ?

Robert Peston @Peston
The 1922 in a nutshell: @theresa_may tells Tory MPs she will whip them to vote for the Brady amendment in spite of being unable to tell them what would replace the backstop, and the ERG Brexiters who she was trying to buy say they will defy her. “Totally nuts” a Tory told me

So the government are telling Tories they have to vote for the amendment, but the ERG are saying no effing way.

And no one is happy.