Westminstenders: Another day of fear and toil

[RedToothBrush]

In a move that surprised no one paying attention, Bercow refused to let Johnson put the WA back to the house today after it had already been presented to the house on Saturday.

This move upset the government but was entirely predictable.

This means that the only way the deal can move forward is through the WA's implementation bill (the WAB). It was published for the first time tonight (all 100 pages of it) and it will be presented to the house tomorrow.

In a lightning fast timetable parliament will be asked to scruntise it. This of course is reckless in the extreme for such an important piece of legislation. The speed at which it is being forced through is the thing that looks most likely to ruffle feathers.

The government is still trying to pretend it can make the 31st October deadline and leave by then. The reality is there isn't enough time for parliament to pass the necessary legislation and the EU will need to also ratify the deal, which in a best case scenario won't happen until next week with an extraordinary EU meeting to do so. This is much more likely to occur the week after at the earliest.

The reality is the EU need an extension themselves which is why we are very likely to get at least a short technical one and remain in the EU beyond next Thursday. It's in the UK and EU's interest if we do want to get a deal done.

Everything that Johnson does though is about optics ahead of a GE. It has to play it all as if he has been prevented from leaving as he promised.

We wait to see the pieces of a deal fall into place. It is in progress now finally it seems. For better or worse.

Prof Meg Russell from UCL Constitution Unit has pointed out that there is no programme motion for the House of Lords - so even if the WAB is rushed through the Commons the HoL could well take time to scrutinise properly.

Meanwhile, The Times is reporting that 75% of Tory Leave voters in England say Brexit is worth letting the Scots go, and 74% say same about NI.

Figures are up from June, which found 63% and 59% respectively.

Yes, I can well believe that figure, Continuity.

One of the few silver linings of this is going to be watching Arlene and co grasping the extent to which they've signed their own P45s.

I truly think I'm stuck on a tiny islet within Hate Island, surrounded by bellends.

Prof Meg Russell from UCL Constitution Unit has pointed out that there is no programme motion for the House of Lords - so even if the WAB is rushed through the Commons the HoL could well take time to scrutinise properly.

Yeah, well ... the lie that the Monarch had some power in life came twinned with a fairy story about how the Lords were able to scrutinise legislation in much more detail than the Commons.

So I wouldn't really count on much from that corner.

However, there is a question about the Lords making their own amendments, or simply not passing the bill. Not quite sure what the precedents on that are . I know they can't block budget bills, and there is a convention (or is it in the Parliament Act ?) that they don't block manifesto bills. Which leads to the very real question as to whether Boris bill is a manifesto bill or not ?

Pmk, minus cats. Thanks as always.

I read these threads avidly but rarely post and am a serial name changer, thank you all for collating the resources and being so damn informative.

I'm plopping this link here for those that are interested in signing such a thing:
www.peoples-vote.uk/letter

Meanwhile, The Times is reporting that 75% of Tory Leave voters in England say Brexit is worth letting the Scots go, and 74% say same about NI.

Poor Queenie. She had one job - secure the Union. All else was frippery.

In other news, Trudeau appears to have won the Canadian election, but with a minority government.

Good article from Hannah White at the Institute for Government:

The government’s proposed timetable for Commons scrutiny of the Withdrawal Agreement Bill (WAB) would be deeply inadequate for any major piece of government legislation. For a constitutional bill which makes probably the most significant changes to the UK’s position in the world that the Commons has been asked to consider for decades, it is extraordinary. The government must know this, but it is asking MPs to agree the timetable or be seen to be thwarting Brexit.

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/blog/governments-timetable-designed-frustrate-brexit-scrutiny

Upsides of Brexit:

Buying a cottage in Cornwall for 3p, painting it blue with the slogan: 'Eat fish, you twats,' on it.

May have to ask MN to delete that ...

Even I know it's unfair.

Yeah, well ... the lie that the Monarch had some power in life came twinned with a fairy story about how the Lords were able to scrutinise legislation in much more detail than the Commons.

I know that’s your line, but it’s not really true. Just look at the EU Withdrawal Bill:

In total, Parliament has spent an estimated over 272 hours debating the bill: 112 hours, 33 minutes in the Commons, and 160 hours, 44 minutes in the Lords.

The Lords made significant changes to the bill. The Government lost 15 votes, with a number of Conservative peers rebelling including previous government ministers. Peers also accepted 170 amendments proposed by the Government.

The Government accepted one, and ended up making concessions on eight of the 15 amendments.

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/eu-withdrawal-bill-amendments-and-debates

In total, Parliament has spent an estimated over 272 hours debating the bill: 112 hours, 33 minutes in the Commons, and 160 hours, 44 minutes in the Lords.

Well, let's see ...

I’m not the first to say this, but BoZo is really taking the piss with “protection” of workers’ rights (Sch 5A).

A minister in charge of a Bill must either make a statement of a non-regression OR say he can’t make such a statement but wants the Bill to go forward anyway.

WTAF?

*excuse typos.

But they’re barely even paying lip service to maintaining rights and protections.

Useful explainer from Institute of Government on the WAB - which highlights what has already been posted on here already about making the PD a binding commitment on the future relationship and the lack of protection of workers rights:

www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/withdrawal-agreement-bill

Future relationship:

The bill provides that the government can only negotiate with the EU on the future UK–EU relationship if the government has obtained Parliament’s approval for its negotiating objectives. Once those objectives have been approved, the government must seek to achieve them.

The bill also says that the government’s negotiating objectives must be consistent with the Political Declaration of 17 October 2019. This declaration says that the UK and the EU should have a free trade agreement.

Workers rights:

When a minister introduces a bill which relates to EU-derived workers’ rights, the bill provides that he or she must either make a statement that the bill does not remove any such right, or make a statement that, even though it does, the government wants to proceed with it anyway.

thanks continuity for those of us who haven't the time to read the whole shebang, the IoG summary is very helpful.

I wish Remain had won the original referendum as the mess has been absolutely not worth it.

But Remain must stop now as we are in a race to the bottom with each deal worse than the one before. BJs deal is worse than TMs and no deal the worst of all worlds. I'm terrified we will crash out and that's it for our country. We need to pass this WA and do a deal to remain in the customs union, have close links with the EU and have a very soft Brexit. That way all but the most rabid Brexiteers should be happy.

The gamesmanship on both sides is awful to see and has destroyed my faith in parliament and democracy.

Victoria Derbyshire is doing a good job pinning MPs down on whether they have read the bill before making their voting decision.

Jim Fitzpatrick (Lab) unashamedly says he hasn’t read any of it but will be voting for it because “it’s time to make a decision”.

Who needs a majority government when this is the opposition?

Sorry, why must Remain "stop now"? What about the DUP and ERG who happily voted down May's deal? Why do you not give them a share of the blame?

My one Leave voting relative has rather unexpectedly applied for Irish citizenship. To which he is entitled.

I am afraid that there is no hell hot enough for those that voted to remove my EU citizenship whilst knowing they could retain their own.

We need to pass this WA and do a deal to remain in the customs union, have close links with the EU and have a very soft Brexit

Have you read the documents? The future you suggest is not what this sets up.

PMK and getting ready to settle in for more mardy arse arguments today.

@yellowallpaper - this deal DOES NOT allow for a customs union - you can wish for it all you like - but if this passes THAT IS NOT AN OPTION