Westministenders: The DisUnited Kingdom of Remaina

[RedToothBrush]

Todays News Round Up (so far):

1. MV2.5 failed by 58 votes.
2. Labour Rebels were not tempted by May's promises of consultation with parliament over the next phase. This is because this is not a binding promise and with a possible change of leader this is even more lacking in substance
3. More ERG than expected switched to supporting the WA. This included leadership hopefuls Johnson and Raab. But there were still 28 hold outs plus 6 Tory Remain Rebels.
4. Macron said that the EU would be the ones to decide the timetable for no deal if we failed to pass the WA or ask for an extension by 12th April. Thus 12th April is NOT necessarily the cliff edge we fear, though it still is no deal. (Its just a possible time delay). As far as a lengthy extension goes he would want not just EP election participation but also more in the way of a concrete way forward than we currently have though.
5. The EUCO are meeting on the April 10th. Thus we have until then to work something out. Thats quite the ask.
6. A series of mini deals in the event of No Deal is something the EU are firmly ruling out. And yet the myth that this will happen is still out there.
7. No Deal would probably mean the Backstop being in effect anyway in practice, simply because its the only way to stop a hard border.
8. The penny has dropped with the DUP over this, and they have finally abandoned the idea of a hard brexit and possibly brexit all together if it threatens NI position in the union. They would rather remain. Thus the GFA problem is at least acknowledged.
9. The DUP did something curious in the indicative votes. They signalled where there was room for them to move, in how they voted - they revealed what they were opposed to and what they might be talked into with their abstaining
10. There seems to be moves elsewhere to a softer brexit with more signatories to Common Market 2.0 gaining support and more vocal support for the Customs Union.
11. Donald Tusk signalled that the EU could change the PD to a custom union relatively easily.
12. May had a meeting earlier with ministers who are urging her to go for No Deal now
13. May said cryptically after the vote in the commons that the process was almost beyond what the house could provide. What she meant by this isn't obvious.
14. The problem is that any deal requires the WA to pass... the WA merely is the divorce arrangement and not the economic and political alignment aftewards. All soft Brexits require the WA.

The DUP will never support the backstop.
And Labour although they say they accept the WA will never support a blind Brexit and distrust the Tories fearing they will backtrack on any PD.
The only way to square this circle is to have a legally binding PD which looks a lot like the backstop with NI and the rUK in it.
Which the ERG would never buy into.
And the EU might not allow.

And to get an extension we'd need to pass legislation for EP elections - and its difficult to work out where May would get a majority in the HoC from to facilitate that without the government collasping in the attempt.

Thus as we move forward the stakes get higher, and without any progress on a deal the chances of both No Deal and Revoke get higher. And I don't fancy testing May's resolve to revoke - especially since that might require parliamentary approval too. Is there a majority to revoke if the alternative really is No Deal?

Parliament needs to move FAST to avoid both. Parliament isn't good at moving fast.

I also note that the DUP's political survival might well rest now with remaining. Apparently like the Conservatives, the uncertainity of Brexit has lead to a loss of confidence in the party amongst business leaders, which has led to a drop in donations. This is coupled with May's threat that No Deal would result in Direct Rule. The likes of Arlene are on the Stormont Pay Role, so this would starve them of money there. And this is all without the prospect of polling on an all Ireland referendum. The ERG hanging them out to dry, only serves to make it or the more likely.

Surely an election beckons one way or another, later this year? This is unsustainable for the DUP. And for May who has today, refused to rule one out...

Prediction: We are going to get through a lot of threads and have late nights between the 9th and 12th.

There is an assumption that Common Market 2.0 negates the need for the WA.

Maybe we should unpick this.

When we leave the EU we will need to pay off all outstanding EU bills. The divorce settlement. The WA covers this.

When we leave the EU we will need to address the status of EU citizens in the UK and their right to stay in the UK as well as their long term rights. Does Common Market 2.0 cover this sufficiently without the need for the WA to clarify this? It works for NI / Irish citizens fairly well but it possibly does not go far enough for other EU citz given the performance of the UK in the last 3 years.

They would still lose certain rights (for example the right to vote in local elections) as this isn't covered by the Single Market - its an EU citizen right.

There is also the danger as the EU see it, for the UK to use EEA / EFTA on a short term basis to circumnavigate rights and long term obligations set out in the WA by simply using it as a transition phase to a harder brexit.

I note that Freedom from discrimination on nationality: a right not to be discriminated against on grounds of nationality is within the scope of application of the Treaty (Article 18) and is specificially mentioned in the WA.

Also see non-EU nationals married to EU nationals who are covered by the terms of EU citzenship to have rights, which they might otherwise not have.

Also see sections on rights for EU nationals born to EU nationals AFTER exit day to ensure that siblings have equal rights of residence.

The terms of the issues set out in the WA for citizens are lifelong.

Once the UK leave the EU, then the EU have no leverage on these things. I find it hard to believe that the EU will not push for the WA as hard as possible for any deal as a result.

Especially since they felt the need to have a good faith clause in the first place. Article 5 of the WA is as follows:

The Union and the United Kingdom shall, in full mutual respect and good faith, assist each other in carrying out tasks which flow from this Agreement.

They shall take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure fulfilment of the obligations arising from this Agreement and shall refrain from any measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of this Agreement.

The WA also is concerned with our withdrawal from Euroatom. Which all the indicative vote are completely silent on. So whats happening with that? We need to also make a quick decision on that.

The WA is also concerned with the Common Fishery Policy, which is not covered by EFTA/EEA. So what happens with that?

This is just from a quick glance. There is likely to be a whole pile of other issues, which no one has really looked into cos the whole idea of CM2.0 minus the WA hasn't been properly scrutised by people who understand these things far better than me.

Common Market 2.0 as an idea only resolves certain issues which are current concerns but it makes no longer term commitments to EU citizens which the WA does. The EU have said that the WA is important to them and they will change the PD if we so desire.

Think about WHY this is. There is no incentive for the EU to renegotiate and say, yeah ok we'll go for Common Market 2.0 without the WA.

I therefore think the assumption that we can have CM2.0 without the WA, is something of a rather optimistic leap of faith.

Isn’t it possible that the E.U. would grant another extension if a GE is called?

They couldn't.

Not if we hadn't passed legislation for the European Elections.

Otherwise we would still be in the EU and would be in breech of the EU's own constitutional requirements.

Legally there is a barrier here, which might not be able to be fudged.

This isn't purely about political will after the 12th April. And the French have made a lot of noises that they have just about had enough and don't want to indulge us anymore.

No real comparison howabout
Massive difference, both in range of affects and the expected time period for No Deal vs French strikes.

When the French are on strike, we still have trade via Rotterdam at least.
We don't lose our 40 FTAs with 70 other countries or our 800 trade arrangements with other countries.

We don't lose access to EURATOM, European Medicines agency, Galileo ...

and of course, French strikes aren't permanent, month after month

I agree the UK won't suffer too badly in the first week - providing Grayling doesn't bugger up too badly -

but after say 6 months the huge UK trade deficit would be seriously affecting what the govt has to spend,
causing many businesses to go broke,
affecting especially farming and manufacturing
unemployment shooting up
....

NoWordforFluffy And the question is can we even negotiate better than exists for Norway? Surely they'd have negotiated better if they could?

"But don't they know who we are?"

The WA also is concerned with our withdrawal from Euroatom

DS, who works in the industry, says that he's heard the thinking is that the UK will want to buy its way back in. If so, why mention it in A50 in the first place? It was initially a wholly separate agreement to the EEC/EU.

Yes as I understood it from what's been discussed on these threads, in all circumstances apart from revoke and no deal the EU is still needing the WA to pass.

Remember all those progress charts Barnier used to show, with the issues market green, yellow, white whatever

They included issues like data protection, Intellectual property, geographical trade rights as for Cheddar or Champagne, ...

The WA resolved all of those, 40-50 of them iirc
It's not just about the backstop, exit bill and expat rights - although those are the headline issues

Dear Gods.

It's a truly horrible mess - and the Tories are still farting about with chairs on the Titanic.

If May was not so batshit crazy, I would be betting on a last minute Revoke. As it stands, I still think we are heading towards a Customs Union (Brexit in name only?), but after @Red's excellent analysis, who knows how it will happen.

Peregrina EURATOM was very early in the development of the EU, in the mid-1950s

The original European Coal and Steel Community was formed in the 1951 Treat of Rome.
Then:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/EuropeanCoallandSteellCommunity

Six years after the Treaty of Paris, the Treaties of Rome were signed by the six ECSC members, creating the European Economic Community (EEC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC or Euratom).

There is no obligation for the Lords to pass any legislation not put forward in the (redundant anyway, since they didn't win a majority) conservative manifesto. And it's a little disingenuous to try and piggyback any new legislation on the back of Brexit too.

The WA also is concerned with our withdrawal from Euroatom.... DS, who works in the industry, says that he's heard the thinking is that the UK will want to buy its way back in. If so, why mention it in A50 in the first place? It was initially a wholly separate agreement to the EEC/EU.

That was a Theresa May Bright Idea © - absolutely unnecessary and nothing to do with Brexit. But everything to do with not having to submit to the ECJ.

While France could initiate problems such as strikes, it would also affect produce delivered by road from Spain and Portugal and Italy (although Italians could take it through Germany which would probably be longer, not looked at the preferred autoroutes).
it needn't even be 'official' as the disruptive elements of the yellow vests may intervene.

Is it practical - or indeed fair - to expect all Remainer politicians or voters to support centrist or centre-left policies

^ Despite the left leaning of MN we have to remember we live in a reasonably centre right country.

The most successful Labour Govt had a number of policies that were arguably centre right in sheep's clothing.

Negotiating after Brexit to "buy our way in" could take years, especially with the current shower being so keen on sovereignty vs regulations, inspections

After No Deal, it probably would not be allowed, since iirc all new EURATOM members must be in the EEA
and especially not for a country that has mightily pissed off the existing EURATOM members.

Leaving with No Deal really is totally different to leaving even with a bare bones deal, wrt how the EU treat us afterwards
and also how other countries would regard us as a negotiating partner
.... having trashed the GFA

The more we look at the issues involved in a future deal, the worse Brexit appears
and that's with a deal.

No Deal, in the medium term, would significantly damage the economy and also break apart the UK

If there is a hell, I hope there is a corner reserved for Cameron - and the fascist ERG / UKIP he pandered too

Now we see the populist far right are infiltrating the moribund Tory party in the country and trying to replace middle of the road Tories with their Kippers

Things seem suspiciously quiet on the DUP front ?

Also, just for lolz but as predicted by "project fear", here's another piece of legislation that's not happening thanks to Brexit

www.moneysavingexpert.com/news/2019/03/probate-fees-hike-postponed/

So people with estates over £2,000,000 are probably quietly toasting Brexit.

Along with the list of companies that have shed staff over Brexit, another illuminating list would be all the laws parliament hasn't passed because of Brexit.

That is an interesting PoV but the risk is that No Deal is not actually bad enough to facilitate it (when the French are all on strike the trade disruption is virtually the same) or more likely that UK hits Revoke before April 12.

The French are not on strike.

The disruption has been intermittent; nevertheless I've seen video of lorry queues up to 40km from the border. It is very different from no deal because

• no extra paperwork is being required
• so far it has affected only one port (Calais port and eurotunnel) and has not involved checks of food or agricultural goods at border inspection points
• only one side of the channel is affected

Very hard to anticipate the effect of no deal, because although modelling suggests that it could lead to queues that simply keep growing (in models of the impact), in practice importers and exporters will change their behaviour - they will temporarily halt exports, raise prices and send critical deliveries by airfreight.

Sorry, bold fail there. First para is a quote.

Anyone else stopped their TV license due to the BBC becoming the brexit broadcasting Corp?

Can't believe I was marching this time last week....

Negotiating after Brexit to "buy our way in" could take years, especially with the current shower being so keen on sovereignty vs regulations, inspections

and as Galileo showed, there are plenty of projects that are restricted to EU members only - at the UKs insistence.

Of course there's every chance the UK will set up world class standards bodies that the US, EU and Asian governments will simply flock to join. Alongside "there's every chance I'll win the lottery for the next 4 weeks" ....

So what will happen to Dominic Grieve now?

It is just all talk or has he really been deselected?

I traditionally support labour but would love him as my MP.

Has anyone else noticed that the state broadcaster is now - extremely belatedly - pointing out in news items and when questioning politicians and pundits that the Conservatives did not win a majority (shocking realisation, that ) and therefore didn't win a mandate for their manifesto

So the red lines and intransigence were/are a choice - and one that should have been called out more by the MSM

DGR, Along with 'our Gavin' terrifying the Chinese with his aircraft carrier.
I suppose the Chinese could have a go at 'plane spotting' as in 'why don't they have any?

PMK

So what will happen to Dominic Grieve now?

Most likely he will not contest the next election, although I think he will get lots of people encouraging him to run as an independent or a tigger. It's a remain constituency, so it's not impossible that he could win, or split the Tory vote and let another party in.