UK Politics: A Partly Political Broadcast

[Chaircat Meow]

FT analysis, makes grim reading - finds possible majority of 5 for the deal. 

It is possible to find three switchers; so the FT assumes Philip Hammond votes for the deal (if we take the three independent Tories they have voting against are Green, Grieve and Bebb). He very well might not. Jo Johnson voted against Letwin today but he's always voted against Brexit in the past. So he might make this all a bit Greek and vote against his brother. Sanbach was making noises about a 2nd referendum too, so she could vote against. Sadly 11 Labour rebels does look about right (and there may even be more) although I think Corbyn could shrink a little if he threatened to take away the whip and expel them from the party. 

[Maltaran]

Not sure how much good that will do - of the 6 who voted against Letwin today, 5 of them are standing down at the next election anyway.

[Chaircat Meow]

1 hour ago, Maltaran said:

Not sure how much good that will do - of the 6 who voted against Letwin today, 5 of them are standing down at the next election anyway.

That's true for the ones who voted against Letwin today but it isn't the case for the abstainers and some other potential rebels.  

[Philokles]

Johnson’s solution to the obeying the Benn act whilst not asking for an extension conundrum is to send the request but not to sign it personally.

I’d expect better from a five year old.

[The Anti-Targ]

So I'm wondering if reunificationists in Northern Ireland would vote for this Brexit plan in a referendum. People suggesting that Johnson's Brexit makes Irish reunification more likely than ever before if it is put in place. So NI remainers might also vote for the Brexit plan because NI remains in the EU. Though perhaps unionist brexiters might vote against. Then I guess there are a few unionist remainers who will stick with remain.

[Mindwalker]

21 minutes ago, Philokles said:

Johnson’s solution to the obeying the Benn act whilst not asking for an extension conundrum is to send the request but not to sign it personally.

I’d expect better from a five year old.

Let me guess, that's the guy people who think all the other politicians are liars will vote for, right?

ETA: He did send a second letter emphasizing the extension was a big mistake.

[Chaircat Meow]

V interesting thread by Dom Walsh. Concludes the numbers are there for the deal but that they are also there for VONC. The reason being the Labour rebels who intend to aid Johnson by pushing Brexit over the line would, for the most part, back a VONC. So, if Corbyn does want an election before Brexit, and providing a long enough extension is secured, it can be done, apparently.

Although I think Corbyn thinks he can win an election after Brexit passes.

[Werthead]

1 hour ago, The Anti-Targ said:

So I'm wondering if reunificationists in Northern Ireland would vote for this Brexit plan in a referendum. People suggesting that Johnson's Brexit makes Irish reunification more likely than ever before if it is put in place. So NI remainers might also vote for the Brexit plan because NI remains in the EU. Though perhaps unionist brexiters might vote against. Then I guess there are a few unionist remainers who will stick with remain.

I think probably not. Those who want reunification are also aware that it could still be many years away, and a bad deal with negative economic consequences could damage Northern Ireland profoundly in the meantime. So whilst that may be a gambit worth taking if there were no real-world consequences, in reality it's more likely that they would vote against the plan in a referendum and vote to Remain. It's also worth noting that both communities in NI are very, very wary of doing anything to upset the Good Friday Agreement, which the deal definitely does even if it's been fudged a bit.

It's possible that all of this BS does trigger a much earlier Northern Ireland unification referendum (I've been thinking 2024, purely on the grounds that this is when Star Trek said it would happen), but it may also not be until much later. 

Quote

Although I think Corbyn thinks he can win an election after Brexit passes.

 

The only way that could happen is if there's something of a repeat of 1945 (at least from Boris's point of view): the PM to get us over the hurdle of a very difficult situation, gets some thanks, then people immediately look at the domestic agenda, realise the PM's vision sucks, and votes for the other guy.

Very, very different circumstances of course, but there could be some repeat of that, except that although Boris is popular in some circles, he's also nowhere near as frigging popular as Churchill.

Some reports tonight that the bill will be voted on Tuesday (the government says Monday evening but that doesn't look possible at the moment) and it will be amended out of the wazoo, and the last gasp might be an amendment requiring a confirmatory referendum which, at the moment, would have support from the LibDems, Greens, SNP, Labour (potentially including at least some of those who are also planning to vote for the deal) and some of the Indy Tories. And, apparently, the DUP will consider it.

If it's the DUP vote that gets us to that point, that would be the final, unexpected plot twist of the whole saga.

Also an interesting point that if they want to hold a GE, there may be a problem in that GEs are usually not held in the winter months due to the severe problems this causes people in rural areas in getting to their polling stations (especially in the north and in Scotland, where the polling station might be many miles away). On that basis it might be that it is not feasible to hold a GE much after this month until around March. No idea if that's actually going to be a realistic concern, but a couple of pundits pointed it out earlier.

[Chaircat Meow]

10 minutes ago, Werthead said:

I think probably not. Those who want reunification are also aware that it could still be many years away, and a bad deal with negative economic consequences could damage Northern Ireland profoundly in the meantime. So whilst that may be a gambit worth taking if there were no real-world consequences, in reality it's more likely that they would vote against the plan in a referendum and vote to Remain. It's also worth noting that both communities in NI are very, very wary of doing anything to upset the Good Friday Agreement, which the deal definitely does even if it's been fudged a bit.

It's possible that all of this BS does trigger a much earlier Northern Ireland unification referendum (I've been thinking 2024, purely on the grounds that this is when Star Trek said it would happen), but it may also not be until much later. 

 

The only way that could happen is if there's something of a repeat of 1945 (at least from Boris's point of view): the PM to get us over the hurdle of a very difficult situation, gets some thanks, then people immediately look at the domestic agenda, realise the PM's vision sucks, and votes for the other guy.

Very, very different circumstances of course, but there could be some repeat of that, except that although Boris is popular in some circles, he's also nowhere near as frigging popular as Churchill.

Some reports tonight that the bill will be voted on Tuesday (the government says Monday evening but that doesn't look possible at the moment) and it will be amended out of the wazoo, and the last gasp might be an amendment requiring a confirmatory referendum which, at the moment, would have support from the LibDems, Greens, SNP, Labour (potentially including at least some of those who are also planning to vote for the deal) and some of the Indy Tories. And, apparently, the DUP will consider it.

If it's the DUP vote that gets us to that point, that would be the final, unexpected plot twist of the whole saga.

Also an interesting point that if they want to hold a GE, there may be a problem in that GEs are usually not held in the winter months due to the severe problems this causes people in rural areas in getting to their polling stations (especially in the north and in Scotland, where the polling station might be many miles away). On that basis it might be that it is not feasible to hold a GE much after this month until around March. No idea if that's actually going to be a realistic concern, but a couple of pundits pointed it out earlier.

Even with the DUP the votes are not there for a confirmatory referendum sadly - I think you would still be short by some 10-15 votes. The plan that appeared to have the most promise was to amend the WAB to require the government to negotiate a customs union (this would have a decent chance of passing) so the Spartans would vote it down bringing us back to square one (not sure practically how this works though). 

[Chaircat Meow]

The thing other that might change matters is an attempt by the Gaukeward squad, or some of them, to amend the WAB to force the government to keep extending the transition period to secure an FTA, given the current 14 months look to be insufficient. The ERG all seem to have been promised this won't happen but if it doesn't it raises the spectre of no deal in another 14 months. What I currently can't work out is whether David Gauke is just a wet blanket and will trust Boris not to let no deal happen then or if whenever he says he'll support the deal he means he will support conditional on some kind of amendment - which the ERG won't accept. 

[A Horse Named Stranger]

That's pretty much in line with Dunt's analysis.

Short version.

Letwin's amendment thew a spanner in the workings. It forces the Goverment to reveal all those pesky little details instead of that broad "I propose a deal, do you support the deal, Yes or No" they tried to get thru.

Quote

[...]

Publishing the legislation could change everything though. Having all the details out there, in brutal black and white, might change minds. It's possible that it could outrage the ERG sufficiently to turn it against the deal, although given how rock-solid they were today that seems unlikely. It might push wobbling Labour MPs into opposition.

Amendments on it could force the debate in one direction or another. It might give MPs a chance to secure a second referendum. Or the DUP could use amendments to protect Northern Irish trade with Britain.

On the other hand, the govt could use amendments to provide more paper-thin assurances to Labour MPs and pull them over into backing it.

Either way, it puts the debate in a new setting, on different terms, with new battlefields, and on an extended timetable. It means critics of Johnson's deal are now in a guerilla warfare campaign, their backs against the wall, using whatever tactics they can find to try and stop this thing.

[...]

The government seems desperate not to  publish that legislation. But it's not clear that they can get away with it. When May tried to pass her deal through the House repeatedly, she was stopped by Speaker John Bercow. Governments that lose votes aren't supposed to just keep on trying until they get the answer they want.

[...]

This is stark, harsh, brutal political warfare, with impossible odds. Remainers are up against it. The government is using numerous dirty tricks to force them to capitulate. The EU are being unhelpful. MPs are volatile and jittery. The numbers in the Commons, for the first time, seem to be narrowly for a deal.

But this is very far from over. The legislation will be a horror show, which could change the debate. The legal background is firm - the Benn Act is triggered and an extension will be granted.

[...]

He doesn't sound too optimistic. But forcing Johnson and his ERG goons to publish all the dirty little details of the deal might dissuade the Labour MPs in question and to reconsider their support.

[A wilding]

On 10/19/2019 at 12:06 PM, Sophelia said:

Actually I just realised it's not due to set off for another hour so I arrived earlier than last time so that could explain it!

About the same numbers as before I think, huge numbers of people, a big crush all the way. We didn't actually make it to parliament square - the crowds were just too solid. Eventually got within hearing distance of a screen just short of the cenotaph and got the tail end of the speeches. Our impression of the mood: grim, resolute.

Incidentally, the BBC has a decent birds eye video of the march here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/video_and_audio/headlines/50111404/hyde-park-to-parliament-in-60-seconds

Hopefully it all made some MPs think a little.

 

[Chaircat Meow]

I guess there is potential for the deal to fail over a Hammond/Gauke anti no deal amendment regarding the end of the 2020 transition. It does seem reasonably clear Hammond, Gauke, Sandbach and Boles would be up for that. Now the ERG have been promised the opposite, Barron and Bone have both explicitly said this - they will not tolerate a transition longer than 14 months, so it is a red line for some of the ERG. So, if such an amendment passes they have to make a decision. 

Do they still support the deal in the hope that Boris Johnson, after he wins an election, will remove the offending amendment from the WAB? Even if he does win an election with a decent majority he may still not have enough no deal MPs to remove the amendment, as whatever remains of Labour, Liberals and SNP will vote for retaining it and so may some Tories. So you probably want a strong commitment to removing it prior to the WAB passing, maybe a sign it would go in the manifesto, but if Boris agrees to that does that lose indie Tory and Labour votes. So this ruse could work and to be fair I don't even think it is a wrecking amendment at all - Gauke is probably sincere in wanting to vote for the deal with proper safeguards. 

But anyway, long and short, it is one minute to midnight, we are very probably fucked and Boris is near to pulling off a total victory over Remain but the majority for the deal is still likely very small, certain amendments could derail it, especially as the ERG seem to have been promised things Boris can't really deliver and the DUP are as mad as hell and can probably pull the plug and take this to an election. 

[Sophelia]

47 minutes ago, A wilding said:

We didn't actually make it to parliament square - the crowds were just too solid. Eventually got within hearing distance of a screen just short of the cenotaph and got the tail end of the speeches. Our impression of the mood: grim, resolute.

I must have been in the same part of the march as you because this was my experience too - also saw tail end of speeches on screen (last time by the time we got to the screen it just had a message saying something like 'thank you go home and march is over').  It was raining quite heavily by then so lots of people headed off and eventually that's what I did too. 

Compared with the previous one a bit less merriment and a soberer mood (though this could have been due to fewer bands/dance troupes and fewer people leading chanting, so lots of quiet walking).  I was there for some of the speeches at the start and there was a general sense that we would be losing the battle (for Brexit) but would continue to to and persuade people in the future - Owen Jones gave a particularly stirring speech referring to suffragettes and civil rights protestors often having to go through a long period of being reviled and attacked before achieving long term changes.  However hearing the news about the Letwin amendment gave an unexpected reprieve and lightened the mood a lot where we had thought we might hear that Boris Johnson's deal had got through while we were still marching.

[Sophelia]

I'm trying to understand the range of possibilities at the moment.  As Chaircat Meow reports here, most people are suggesting that Boris Johnson's deal would get through:

On 10/19/2019 at 7:11 PM, Chaircat Meow said:

FT analysis, makes grim reading - finds possible majority of 5 for the deal. 

It is possible to find three switchers; so the FT assumes Philip Hammond votes for the deal (if we take the three independent Tories they have voting against are Green, Grieve and Bebb). He very well might not. Jo Johnson voted against Letwin today but he's always voted against Brexit in the past. So he might make this all a bit Greek and vote against his brother. Sanbach was making noises about a 2nd referendum too, so she could vote against. Sadly 11 Labour rebels does look about right (and there may even be more) although I think Corbyn could shrink a little if he threatened to take away the whip and expel them from the party. 

So lots of reports that the Brexit deal could be sealed tomorrow or Tuesday.  But this confuses me because I thought the Letwin amendment said that it could not be considered until all legal stuff had been agreed, partly so there was sufficient time for scrutiny (not the 48-hour rush) but also mainly to protect against the possibility that the legal stuff wouldn't be agreed in Parliament in time to prevent a No Deal.  But I can't believe that all those legal bits would be ready so quickly, unless they had them written already and just didn't reveal them.  But even if so, this wouldn't be enough time for everyone to read them properly.  It is also likely that the legal bits might end up quite contentious and take some time to discuss, so surely no agreement to the whole shebang so quickly?

The other thing, as Chaircat Meow points out, is that other people have the chance to suggest amendments to the deal. I hadn't heard of this one:

21 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

The thing other that might change matters is an attempt by the Gaukeward squad, or some of them, to amend the WAB to force the government to keep extending the transition period to secure an FTA, given the current 14 months look to be insufficient. The ERG all seem to have been promised this won't happen but if it doesn't it raises the spectre of no deal in another 14 months. What I currently can't work out is whether David Gauke is just a wet blanket and will trust Boris not to let no deal happen then or if whenever he says he'll support the deal he means he will support conditional on some kind of amendment - which the ERG won't accept. 

I have heard that labour are going to propose a referendum, but my sources agree with Chaircat Meow that this is unlikely to get enough votes (I don't understand why it is so unpopular myself, but I think one big problem is that apparently it takes at least 5 months to organise a referendum, much longer than it takes to organise a General Election).  If Boris Johnson's deal does not get agreed, then I would have thought one way to break that stalemate would be to put it to a confirmatory referendum (Boris deal vs. Remain), might get sufficient votes (not ideal from my personal viewpoint but seems fair).

22 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Even with the DUP the votes are not there for a confirmatory referendum sadly - I think you would still be short by some 10-15 votes. The plan that appeared to have the most promise was to amend the WAB to require the government to negotiate a customs union (this would have a decent chance of passing) so the Spartans would vote it down bringing us back to square one (not sure practically how this works though). 

Yes it is this final thing that I have heard could be the only real chance for Johnson's deal to fail.

My assumption was that Johnson would bring his deal back in a few weeks once the legal bits have been filled out, after which there would be discussions and negotiations in Parliament with the likelihood that the whole thing would then get agreed, and an outside chance that once they'd seen the small print, some of the people who seemed to be going to vote for the deal, would not, so that it might not get through after all.  (I had thought that people who voted against Theresa May's deal would also vote against this one, since it seems similar, though worse from most perspectives apart from those of the far right, but oddly it seems more popular)

So I'm very puzzled why on the one hand people are saying Brexit deal is pretty certain to be agreed in the next two days, and on the other hand (different) people are saying the government blew it yesterday and the Brexit deal is pretty certain to fall apart.  Social media is giving me massive mood swings!

[Sophelia]

Obviously I don't want Boris Johnson's deal to get through, but if it gets to the point where No confidence/resignation ends in an election before any deal has been agreed (assuming the EU permits another extension), the outcome could be even worse. Despite the horrendous things the Tories have done (to the country generally as well as their lack of integrity - in all senses of the word), opinion polls are still showing high popularity for the Tories suggesting they would probably win a general election with a larger majority than they have now (correct me if I'm wrong!).  This means that votes which recently have been very close are likely in future to be more easily won by the Tories, and could even result in a No Deal if Brexit party or Hard Brexit Tories are voted in.  So I feel in the long term pessimistic, despite some glimmers of hope over the last few months.  If most of my fellow-citizens think the country they want is one run by the Tories, the problem (as I see it) runs far deeper than just Brexit.  (I am biased here, as a socialist)

To add that, if the Brexit deal is agreed and then there is a general election afterwards, if the Lib Dems run on a promise to rejoin the EU, I can see that being quite popular as a one-issue manifesto (but I'm not sure it would gain enough votes because there are a proportion of remainers who feel that would betray the leave vote in the referendum, and because due to the transition period people wouldn't have noticed much of a change).

[Chaircat Meow]

1 minute ago, Sophelia said:

Obviously I don't want Boris Johnson's deal to get through, but if it gets to the point where No confidence/resignation ends in an election before any deal has been agreed (assuming the EU permits another extension), the outcome could be even worse. Despite the horrendous things the Tories have done (to the country generally as well as their lack of integrity - in all senses of the word), opinion polls are still showing high popularity for the Tories suggesting they would probably win a general election with a larger majority than they have now (correct me if I'm wrong!).  This means that votes which recently have been very close are likely in future to be more easily won by the Tories, and could even result in a No Deal if Brexit party or Hard Brexit Tories are voted in.  So I feel in the long term pessimistic, despite some glimmers of hope over the last few months.  If most of my fellow-citizens think the country they want is one run by the Tories, the problem (as I see it) runs far deeper than just Brexit.  (I am biased here, as a socialist)

No, not wrong. The problem is Corbyn. If Labour had a charismatic leader who could win an election then the situation would be totally transformed. 

I think a referendum would be preferable to an election with Corbyn still in charge but it isn't totally hopeless and if there is no other way to stop the deal Labour should put down the VONC. The DUP would likely back if there was no other way to stop Brexit. 

[Sophelia]

8 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

No, not wrong. The problem is Corbyn. If Labour had a charismatic leader who could win an election then the situation would be totally transformed. 

I understand what you're saying but if my fellow citizens have weighed up both sides and think 'charisma' (whatever that may be) is the deciding factor which tips them to vote Tory over Labour, that's the problem in a nutshell! 

[Ser Hedge]

https://www.ft.com/content/1ab8b440-f1bf-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

 

Opinion European Union

Brussels believes it is now time to move on with Brexit

EU leaders want to minimise disruption and concentrate on other pressing issues

WOLFGANG MÜNCHAU

--------------------------

That's his opinion of course, I also see editorials in Europe recommending the EU stay patient. On balance, likely no decision will be made until the WAB has actually failed seems the view of most.

[The Anti-Targ]

1 hour ago, Sophelia said:

Obviously I don't want Boris Johnson's deal to get through, but if it gets to the point where No confidence/resignation ends in an election before any deal has been agreed (assuming the EU permits another extension), the outcome could be even worse. Despite the horrendous things the Tories have done (to the country generally as well as their lack of integrity - in all senses of the word), opinion polls are still showing high popularity for the Tories suggesting they would probably win a general election with a larger majority than they have now (correct me if I'm wrong!).  This means that votes which recently have been very close are likely in future to be more easily won by the Tories, and could even result in a No Deal if Brexit party or Hard Brexit Tories are voted in.  So I feel in the long term pessimistic, despite some glimmers of hope over the last few months.  If most of my fellow-citizens think the country they want is one run by the Tories, the problem (as I see it) runs far deeper than just Brexit.  (I am biased here, as a socialist)

To add that, if the Brexit deal is agreed and then there is a general election afterwards, if the Lib Dems run on a promise to rejoin the EU, I can see that being quite popular as a one-issue manifesto (but I'm not sure it would gain enough votes because there are a proportion of remainers who feel that would betray the leave vote in the referendum, and because due to the transition period people wouldn't have noticed much of a change).

They didn't have a majority even before the rebels left. That's why they needed to cosy up to the DUP to form a govt. And with what the Johnson deal does to Northern Ireland I don't think the Tories could rely on the DUP this time around. They may end up with a small outright majority, but that makes winning votes to deliver no-deal very hard, since there will still be Tory MPs opposed to no deal.

20 minutes ago, Ser Hedge said:

https://www.ft.com/content/1ab8b440-f1bf-11e9-bfa4-b25f11f42901

 

Opinion European Union

Brussels believes it is now time to move on with Brexit

EU leaders want to minimise disruption and concentrate on other pressing issues

WOLFGANG MÜNCHAU

--------------------------

That's his opinion of course, I also see editorials in Europe recommending the EU stay patient. On balance, likely no decision will be made until the WAB has actually failed seems the view of most.

It's surely still in the EU's best interests for the UK to leave with a deal. It hurts the UK a lot to leave without a deal, but it also hurts the EU albeit a little bit less. And if shit hits the fan for the UK as people think it will with a no deal it hurts the whole world economy to some degree if the UK leaves without a deal.

I don't know why the EU seems to care that some people in Britain accuse the EU of trying to stop the UK from leaving the EU. They should just say leaving the EU is for Britain to do, but the EU isn't going to kick the UK out because of some arbitrary deadline. Every time the UK asks for an extension it will be granted, until it stops asking and actually make a decision, one way or the other. Just because a deadline is extended it doesn't stop the UK leaving earlier if it sorts its shit out (there is no practical time now, but in theory the UK can leave any time so long as the right votes succeed in Parliament). There is nothing stopping the UK leaving on 31 Oct 2019 even if a 1 year extension is granted. It just won't crash out automatically against the will of what seems to be a majority of the people and the majority of parliament. If Johnson gets the necessary legislation done before 31 Oct you can leave with everyone's best wishes.