Westminstenders: The Rebellion

[RedToothBrush]

This week is the start of another big week. Touted (again) as high noon. However the end of February marks a watershed in many ways. Parliament simply can not kick the can further. Its last stand time.

Three Cabinet ministers are openly saying back Cooper-Boles. They are joined by other ministers and intend to vote for it regardless of the government position. And will break protocol by refusing to resign to do so. This leaves May with the option of accepting it or sacking them.

The breaking of collective responsibility would be a bit deal. But May can not easily sack them. She simply has so little power left.

These ministers are backed by up to 100 moderates too. And with the emergence of the TIGGERS the mood has changed with others emboldened in their rebellion and arguably more likely to go.

Meanwhile Corbyn is losing even more authority. In what looks like a last ditch attempt to retain remain support in the face of the TIGGERS whilst also leaving to the point where it is realistic, noises are being made that Labour are about to back a People's Vote. It sounds symbolic rather than meaningful in anyway.

The antisemitic row, however, seems to be engulfing the party even further with MPs seen as Jewish, or not loyal Corbynites subject to intense amounts of abuse for being diplomatic or sympathetic in the face of resignations. The spectacle of Labour infighting has been laid bare in a very public way and it doesn't look healthy and is swallowing all column inches over and above any policy regarding either austerity or Brexit.

What this means for votes this week is important. The power of the whip on both sides of the house is completely fractured. MPs are more likely to vote with conscience than party lines than previously.

Where this leads us is now wide open.

An extension now looks all but inevitable. But for how long, at what price and for what ends ultimately in terms of a deal or no deal.

This noise seems very much at odds with other voices.

The Government itself, however, still seems to be planning to get WA legislation through parliament at the last minute at the end of March. (This would also involve May using measures which break parliamentary constitutional arrangements). And prominent leavers are suggesting that an extention will just kill Brexit off completely.

A GE is also very much looming. The TIGGERS emergence is such a threat that both parties will now possibly want it sooner rather than later (for slightly differing reasons). They will not want them to become established or prepared for an election. But calling an election now closes parliament and enables no deal by default. A GE after an extension or Brexit is a different prospect too.

Things are likely to get very busy this week. Time to brace once again.

tatiana The backstop doesn't require the Uk to be able to negotiate anything:
it's what the UK falls into automatically if it can't negotiate a trade deal with the EU

Yes, the backstop then restricts what the UK can do, because it includes all the SM rules on workers rights & the environment
That's what I'm getting at:
The ERG won't be able to have most of the non-EU trade deals they want, e.g. with the US

The only way they can avoid this to pull out of the WA at the end of transition
i.e. break the WA treaty
in which case the UK would be in serious trouble

Noone is naive enough to think the backstop is as good as we would wish
e.g. it does NOT enable fully frictionless trade

• the point is that this is still miles better trade flow than a No Deal Brexit

"They had to lock the U.K. down into a legally binding agreement to not only protect NI but also to protect the SM"

Precisely
The UK can't get out of it, unless it agrees a trade deal with the EU that does not harden the border - that means SM

The terms of the backstop are what prevent the ERG doing a lot of what they want

That's why the No Deal WA - its worst case - is much better than a No Deal Brexit

^The backstop doesn't require the Uk to be able to negotiate anything:
it's what the UK falls into automatically if it can't negotiate a trade deal with the EU^

To avoid the backstop kicking in, the U.K. needs to negotiate a trade deal with frictionless borders. Ie not the FTA the Tories are explicitly after.

WA being better than No Deal is not much of compliment. No Deal is not the only alternative. It’s the one we’re hurtling towards at the moment, but it may not be where we ultimately end up.

Latest update on access to medicines post Brexit from : www.gov.uk/government/news/update-on-medicines-and-medical-products-supply-as-we-exit-the-eu

Leaving the EU with a deal remains the government’s top priority and would give businesses the stability and certainty to prepare for our new relationship after EU Exit. However, the government must plan for every possible outcome, including no deal.

The Department of Health and Social Care (DHSC) is working closely with trade bodies, product suppliers, the health and care system in England, the devolved administrations and crown dependencies (the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey) to make detailed plans to ensure the continued supply of medical products to the UK in the event of a no-deal EU Exit.

Together with industry and the health and care system, DHSC has analysed:

the supply chains of 12,300 medicines
almost half a million product lines of medical devices and clinical consumables
vaccines used in national and local programmes
essential non-clinical goods on which the health and care system relies, such as linen, scrubs and food
Around three-quarters of the medicines and over half of the clinical consumables we use come from or via the EU. The main risk to supply is reduced traffic flow between the ports of Calais and Dover or Folkestone.

DHSC also has responsibility to ensure medicines supply on behalf of the devolved administrations and crown dependencies, and they have accepted the department’s offer to manage the supply on their behalf. All supply arrangements therefore take into account the requirements for the whole of the UK. There has been excellent engagement from all parties, and preparation plans are well advanced as a result.

Following this analysis, DHSC has put in place a multi-layered approach to minimise any supply disruption, including:

securing, via the Department for Transport, additional roll-on, roll-off freight capacity away from Dover and Folkestone for goods to continue to come into the UK from 29 March
buffer stocks and stockpiling, where this is practical, or asking industry or NHS Supply Chain to build up buffer stocks in the UK before 29 March
buying extra warehouse space to hold additional stock
booking space on aeroplanes for products that require an immediate shipment due to short shelf-life or specific storage conditions
making changes to, or clarifications of, regulatory requirements so companies can continue to sell their products in the UK even if we have no deal
strengthening the processes and resources used to deal with shortages in the event that they do occur despite everyone’s efforts
A combination of securing freight, buffer stocks, stockpiling and warehousing, and regulatory flexibility will be required help to ensure the continuation of medical supplies.

By securing additional freight capacity to ensure a continued flow of products, stockpiling and providing warehouse storage capacity as a further contingency, and removing regulatory barriers, medicines and medical products should continue to be available for the NHS, other healthcare providers and the public in the event of a no-deal EU exit.

Local stockpiling is unnecessary and could cause shortages in other areas, which could put patient care at risk. It is important that patients order their repeat prescriptions as normal and keep taking their medicines as normal.

While we never give guarantees, we are confident that, if everyone – including suppliers, freight companies, our international partners, and the health and care system – does what they need to do, the supply of medicines and medical products should be uninterrupted in the event of exiting the EU without a deal

Precisely? The UK can't get out of it, unless it agrees a trade deal with the EU that does not harden the border - that means SM

NI can’t get out of it. The U.K. could get out of it potentially, by leaving NI behind.

The EU insisted on the backstop because they got wind of the headbangers intention of reneging on the WA.

The ERG/Davis/Fox/Raab/Gove don't seem to realise that a) most of the Europeans they're dealing with can. Understand. English. and what's more b) they do actually do their homework and take notice of what the English politicians are saying

Hence the need for a watertight backstop

Amen to that.

I’m off to bed.

the EU may not agree to GB leaving NI behind,

certainly not if that means GB becoming an offshore competitor with much lower standards for workers rights, environment etc

... and hence lower costs

The EU are insistent on a "level playing field" and avoiding a race to the bottom

A second vote would probably be good even if remain was not on the ballot paper. If the ballot involved the Labour plan (which seems to be basically EFTA/EEA) and May's deal, I am 100% on board with choosing EEA/EFTA over either May's deal or no deal. And I say that as a staunch remainer who would definitely like to see remain on the ballot paper on the basis that it's clearly the best of all possible worlds. But it sounds like remain will be on the ballot if they can get it through. To which I say, about bloody time.

The Labour proposal is only a vague idea and could take most of the 21 months to flesh out properly, if at all

Big issue:
Labour isn't EEA /EFTA, unless they have dropped their opposition to the SM and FOM

Also, EFTA don't want us in:
EFTA have to agree all new EU rules unanimously. To date, that hasn't been much of a problem, but they fear that the UK would frequently block new rules, which would mean all EFTA members being barred from some SM benefits

So, we would have to be in a 3rd EEA pillar on our own

If the UK want to negotiate a new framework for the future relationship, particularly "frictionless trade"
then that means the SM
So the govt will have to drop its red lines and accept FOM and ECJ

Otherwise, we'll end up with much the same WA as now

Saw this and thought of the classics nerds among us Brexit Britain needs a last minute Greek lesson

That's the whole thing of current politics. May and Corbyn's common interest in enabling the others awful behaviour helps give them power in their own cultural bubble at the expense of moderate voices who can see the unjustifiable being justified 'because you wouldn't want the other side to be on charge'.

Great post, RTB

www.bbc.com/news/uk-47358602

'Chagos Islands dispute: UK obliged to end control - UN''

Mauritius claims it was forced to give up the islands - now a British overseas territory - in 1965 in exchange for independence, which it gained in 1968...

...The International Court of Justice said the islands were not lawfully separated from the former colony of Mauritius...

...Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf described the UK's administration of the Chagos Islands - located more than 2,000 miles off the east coast of Africa - as "an unlawful act of continuing character".

Analysis

By BBC Hague correspondent Anna Holligan

A "blockbuster" of an opinion from the UN's highest court.

The judges' assessment was damning. At the heart of it, the right of all people to self-determination as a basic human right, which the UK violated when dismembering its former colony.

The detachment of the strategically valuable archipelago cannot have been said to be based on free and genuine expression of the will of the people concerned, when one side is under the authority of the other.

As the ruling power, the responsibility lay with the UK to respect national unity and territory integrity of Mauritius as required under international law.

Instead, it divided the territory - effectively using the process of decolonisation to create a new colony.

As part of the advisory opinion the judges poignantly pointed out that all UN member states were under obligation to cooperate to complete the decolonisation of Mauritius. This includes, of course, the US, which operates a military base on the largest atoll of Diego Garcia.

====> "Discuss with reference to the creation of Northern Ireland in 1922."

Maybe there's a small shift in the "sense" surrounding Brexit that - having had their way for over two years - Brexiteers have had their day.

Whether they are leading it or hanging in it's coat-tails, Labours "epiphany" does seem to have had some effect.

On another forum I use, where Brexiteers have up until now been very vocal there were quite a few objections to the idea of a PV with remain as an option and each one was countered by more than one poster saying that if Brexiteers aren't happy with the Tory Brexit they're getting, they can't be critical of people wanting a second vote.

Of course that will leave the blame for no-Brexit at the Tories door.

Morning all.
Were the wto tarries published yesterday? I read at the weekend they were going to be but haven't seen anything in the news.

I wonder what today will bring?

I don't think they were Sparkly, no. Haven't seen anything about it from trade bods on twitter.

Although I have just seen this:

mobile.twitter.com/alanbeattie/status/1100282965110779905

Guardian piece on Labour's move
“They want Brexit done and dusted now.

“But when it is explained that after leaving, still longer and more complex trade negotiations lie ahead, that, says Cooper, “brings focus groups to horrified silence”. Leavers and remainers say they had no idea how difficult leaving would be: none of us did. Where do voters stand now? Few switch sides, but the switchers all move towards remain. Those who didn’t vote but would do so next time break 3:1 for remain.”

See, I really resent that "none of us did" line.
Plenty of us did and have been made to feel like idiots and snowflakes for 3 years. I'm really angry at how we've been treated. The sane ones, the ones who saw this and researched and warned people too lazy to give a toss.

I really don't know what either main party thinks they've gained by alienating half of the country in this way.

That's very interesting, Lonely. I think a second vote (revoke vs WA) would have a rather different result as scales seem to have dropped from a fair number of eyes since the TIG movement gathered momentum. The mood does feel different to me. I'm remaining cautiously optimistic at present.

Leavers and remainers say they had no idea how difficult leaving would be: none of us did.

Fuck. Off.

Remainers have said all long that the process of leaving would be far more complex than the Leave campaign said.

Don't rewrite history.

Leavers and remainers say they had no idea how difficult leaving would be: none of us did

Yep annoys me too Lonely, as you say, loads of us did - one reason for my decision was that it is not possible to extract ourselves from 40 plus years of ever closer trade integration - then add in NI....
It says little for the likes of our MPs if this has really come as a shock to them.
Perhaps they can now also see how poor the WA is and the future trading relationship is going to be? ....years of even more divisive arguing.

I'd like to see Labours poll ratings now they appear to have backed a PV.

Meanwhile, on AIBU, at least one poster has put recent developments together to add up to "Brexit is cancelled". I wonder if there's some sort of critical mass thing happening ?

Brexiteers are very quiet now. I mean eerily quiet,

When we said what a nightmare leaving would be we were told Project Fear.
Even now I've had one Tory politician saying that to me.