UK Politics: A Partly Political Broadcast

[Denvek]

9 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

If he could get a GE under the FTPA; he can then dissolve parliament whenever he wants, regardless of the election date - meaning that there's no-one at home to receive or debate any extension offer from the EU - and we crash out without a deal. I THINK that he simply has to accept a 31/01/20 extension date without debate (Benn Act), but anything else has to be discussed in parliament - so drop out)

 

No, the Benn Act considered this and so the default is the opposite - Parliament must affirmatively vote to crash out. If an extension date is offered that isn't 31st January 2020 then it is automatically accepted unless Parliament votes otherwise within 2 days of the offer.

If Parliament is dissolved due to an election then I don't believe it can be recalled for any kind of vote like this, I think that the MPs officially stop being MPs as soon as the dissolution happens.

[Which Tyler]

OK Thank You

[Sophelia]

On 10/23/2019 at 9:55 AM, mormont said:

A horrifying and sad story:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50150070

39 people.

More information only makes it worse - cuts to the heart. I'm not linking the most tragic things I have read, but this for general background to what these people might have been heading to is bad enough:

https://www.theguardian.com/law/2019/oct/25/trafficked-vietnamese-and-the-lure-of-uk-nail-bars-and-cannabis-farms

[A Horse Named Stranger]

Just done my morning skim thru of the guardian.

Two things, let's start with the funny bit.

Rory's campaign to become London Mayor is off to a reasonably good start, I'd say.

Then let's go back to the elephant in the thread.

Do we finally see a way out of this mess, and will MPs finally get their act together? This looks almost reasonable, so it's probably not gonna happen.

 

[Which Tyler]

3 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

Just done my morning skim thru of the guardian.

Two things, let's start with the funny bit.

Rory's campaign to become London Mayor is off to a reasonably good start, I'd say.

Then let's go back to the elephant in the thread.

Do we finally see a way out of this mess, and will MPs finally get their act together? This looks almost reasonable, so it's probably not gonna happen.

 

SO24 was pretty much guarantees the moment Tree-Frog announced that they were going to silk and government was going to go on strike.

The only question isnwhat will be done with the order - Force the deal to be scrutinized? Force the addition of customs union / workers rights / environmental morotections / tax regulations? Attempt a 3rd referendum? Their own general election motion, setting their own date and conditions?

[Ser Hedge]

13 hours ago, A Horse Named Stranger said:

 

Rory's campaign to become London Mayor is off to a reasonably good start, I'd say.

https://mobile.twitter.com/RoryStewartUK/status/1137811697027170309

And that's the original incident/interview linked in the article. I was convinced the media and the other parties were going overboard before I actually watched it, but  having watched it, I think Rory has indeed blown whatever slim chances he might have had. If he thinks these guys are gangsters, then he is a bit clueless. Kudos for resigning from the Tory party, but I think his career in politics is going to be an uphill struggle now. Pity though, he seemed more genuine than most.

 

[Chaircat Meow]

Rumours doing the rounds the Liberals and the SNP preparing an amendment to the FTPA to allow an election on 9 December and no further scrutiny of the WAB. If Boris agrees the election will happen, as Tories + Liberals + SNP are enough for the simple majority override of the FTPA. If this happens the decisive resolution we've been waiting for is coming on us fast. 

I tend to think Remainers ought to favour this election. If there is no resolution I fear more and more MPs will just drift to eventually supporting the WAB and it will get through. We only need to knock out 15 or so Tories and you have a Parliament that will eventually revoke rather than do any Brexit deal. Given the polling this will be tough but by no means impossible. All those Labour MPs who voted for 2nd WAB reading only have themselves to blame for an election (if it happens) that they likely don't want. 

[williamjm]

13 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

I tend to think Remainers ought to favour this election. If there is no resolution I fear more and more MPs will just drift to eventually supporting the WAB and it will get through. We only need to knock out 15 or so Tories and you have a Parliament that will eventually revoke rather than do any Brexit deal. Given the polling this will be tough but by no means impossible. All those Labour MPs who voted for 2nd WAB reading only have themselves to blame for an election (if it happens) that they likely don't want. 

I think you're right, if they really want to do anything more than delay or tinker with the details of Boris' deal then they need an election and hope they can outperform the polls since they don't really have a majority at the moment to do anything more than that. It might well end up in a big win for the Tories but that would still be a danger with a later election.

[Werthead]

On 10/24/2019 at 9:03 PM, Chaircat Meow said:

Longer this goes unresolved the more time Corbyn has to step down. This is the only Remain masterstroke I can think of. As long as Long-Bailey does not take over. 

Long-Bailey is absolutely not on the general public's radar at all. That might change in an actual contest, but right now the names in the hat your average punter would recognise would be Starmer (who'd the best most effective foil to the Tories), Abbott, Watson and maybe Rayner (although Phillips probably has a higher profile). Abbott I suspect knows she would be a liability given the absolute hatred a lot of the press has for her and I doubt would stand.

 

Quote

 

I tend to think Remainers ought to favour this election. If there is no resolution I fear more and more MPs will just drift to eventually supporting the WAB and it will get through. We only need to knock out 15 or so Tories and you have a Parliament that will eventually revoke rather than do any Brexit deal. Given the polling this will be tough but by no means impossible. All those Labour MPs who voted for 2nd WAB reading only have themselves to blame for an election (if it happens) that they likely don't want. 

 

 

Remainers shouldn't be favouring an election at all, because the mechanics of FPTP seem to favour Brexit even if the overall vote in support of Brexit (especially versus No Deal) has declined. A third referendum would be marginally in favour of Remain if the alternative option is No Deal, and against the Deal it's probably back to 50/50.

The only way a GE works in Remain's favour is if the Brexit vote gets split between the Brexit Party, Tories and Brexit-supporting Labour enough for a LibDem-SNP coalition which could then argue it has the mandate to revoke Article 50. And that seems extremely unlikely.

The DUP completely threw Boris under the bus at their conference, and seem to be reinforcing the idea that they will consider other options to halt any damage to the Union, including possibly backing another referendum.

Quote

I think you're right, if they really want to do anything more than delay or tinker with the details of Boris' deal then they need an election and hope they can outperform the polls since they don't really have a majority at the moment to do anything more than that. It might well end up in a big win for the Tories but that would still be a danger with a later election.

Putting Boris into a position where he has to resign and then get the GE done seems safer, but it's not going to happen. Boris as PM for the next five years is a stunning national liability on just about every single level.

[Chaircat Meow]

1 minute ago, Werthead said:

Long-Bailey is absolutely not on the general public's radar at all. That might change in an actual contest, but right now the names in the hat your average punter would recognise would be Starmer (who'd the best most effective foil to the Tories), Abbott, Watson and maybe Rayner (although Phillips probably has a higher profile). Abbott I suspect knows she would be a liability given the absolute hatred a lot of the press has for her and I doubt would stand.

 

 

Remainers shouldn't be favouring an election at all, because the mechanics of FPTP seem to favour Brexit even if the overall vote in support of Brexit (especially versus No Deal) has declined. A third referendum would be marginally in favour of Remain if the alternative option is No Deal, and against the Deal it's probably back to 50/50.

The only way a GE works in Remain's favour is if the Brexit vote gets split between the Brexit Party, Tories and Brexit-supporting Labour enough for a LibDem-SNP coalition which could then argue it has the mandate to revoke Article 50. And that seems extremely unlikely.

The DUP completely threw Boris under the bus at their conference, and seem to be reinforcing the idea that they will consider other options to halt any damage to the Union, including possibly backing another referendum.

Putting Boris into a position where he has to resign and then get the GE done seems safer, but it's not going to happen. Boris as PM for the next five years is a stunning national liability on just about every single level.

Don't get me wrong, this situation is BAD. 

The issue with your plan is there is no majority in this Parliament for a 2nd referendum even with the DUP on board. All Tories will vote against as long as there is a deal on the table and about 20 Labour MPs are opposed. This suggests a 2nd ref would always be 20 votes short and you would need a bigger majority than that to get the bill through.

And if Remainers can't come up with some plan of how we stop Brexit and end this endless indecision I think inertia pushes us towards Boris's deal. 

[Which Tyler]

12 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Don't get me wrong, this situation is BAD. 

The issue with your plan is there is no majority in this Parliament for a 2nd referendum even with the DUP on board. All Tories will vote against as long as there is a deal on the table and about 20 Labour MPs are opposed. This suggests a 2nd ref would always be 20 votes short and you would need a bigger majority than that to get the bill through.

And if Remainers can't come up with some plan of how we stop Brexit and end this endless indecision I think inertia pushes us towards Boris's deal. 

Erm... About your maths...

Agreed on all Tories (288). How many labour is up for debate, but if we take your 20, that leaves 308 against.

If rest of Labour, SNP, LD, DUP, CHUK, PC and Green gives us 299

And 35 independents, mostly ex-Tory, who, I think, generally want a 2nd ref on WAB Vs Remain. A 2 : 1 split in that group gives a majority for a second ref.

 

When 2nd ref was compared to May's less extreme deal, it lost by 12, it's easily possible that Cockwomble's harder deal that's undoubtedly worse for the labor market, pushes those rebel labour MPs to abstain, rather than vote with the government, or that his expulsion of moderate tories swings the difference. Hell, even the loss of May's cabinet (who abstained when they disagreed with the whip) would make a difference on adding a customs union (lost by 3)

[Ser Hedge]

14 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

Rumours doing the rounds the Liberals and the SNP preparing an amendment to the FTPA to allow an election on 9 December and no further scrutiny of the WAB. 

As in a complete pause of the WAB. Very interesting.

In a way it will be a kind of clean GE campaign:

Tories for the WAB on the table.

Lib Dems, SNP and presumably Greens and PC for second referendum: Revoke vs whatever deal the largest party has in hand at the moment.

Labour: (as it stands) Negotiate another deal, then second referendum: Revoke vs that deal.

Frogface: No deal Brexit.

DUP: Same treatment for NI as everyone else, which logically boils down to 1. No Deal + tearing up GFA (not happening) and hence 2. Second Referundum

Sinn Fein: Sitting on the coach at home enjoying the popcorn.

[Werthead]

14 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

about 20 Labour MPs are opposed

This isn't quite right either. There are ~20 Labour MPs who are broadly behind Boris's deal as long as it does not impact on workers' rights. Now it is clear that those are on the table, and there will be massive, further deregulation of workers' rights in the long run, many of those would likely switch to backing a referendum, on the grounds they can then say to their Leave voters they can get behind and back the deal on the understanding of the consequences.

[Chaircat Meow]

2 hours ago, Which Tyler said:

Erm... About your maths...

Agreed on all Tories (288). How many labour is up for debate, but if we take your 20, that leaves 308 against.

If rest of Labour, SNP, LD, DUP, CHUK, PC and Green gives us 299

And 35 independents, mostly ex-Tory, who, I think, generally want a 2nd ref on WAB Vs Remain. A 2 : 1 split in that group gives a majority for a second ref.

 

When 2nd ref was compared to May's less extreme deal, it lost by 12, it's easily possible that Cockwomble's harder deal that's undoubtedly worse for the labor market, pushes those rebel labour MPs to abstain, rather than vote with the government, or that his expulsion of moderate tories swings the difference. Hell, even the loss of May's cabinet (who abstained when they disagreed with the whip) would make a difference on adding a customs union (lost by 3)

The Financial Times (Sebastian Payne - you can find diagrams on twitter) estimate there are only 297 votes for a 2nd referendum and 338 against. If we switch the DUP it comes out 328 vs 307 and still loses easily.

The mistakes I think you and Werthead are making are 1) you think the Indie Tories will back a 2nd referendum and they won't providing a deal is on the table. If it was no deal vs Remain they might go for a 2nd referendum but that is not the situation, 2) The Great Charlatan's deal has less Labour support because it is worse for workers' rights - this perhaps ought to be true but voting patterns and comment from labour MPs suggest it is sadly not true.

[Ser Hedge]

43 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

The Financial Times (Sebastian Payne - you can find diagrams on twitter) estimate there are only 297 votes for a 2nd referendum and 338 against. If we switch the DUP it comes out 328 vs 307 and still loses easily.

The mistakes I think you and Werthead are making are 1) you think the Indie Tories will back a 2nd referendum and they won't providing a deal is on the table. If it was no deal vs Remain they might go for a 2nd referendum but that is not the situation, 2) The Great Charlatan's deal has less Labour support because it is worse for workers' rights - this perhaps ought to be true but voting patterns and comment from labour MPs suggest it is sadly not true.

This would be my understanding as well from what I've read so far, but in the last couple of days workers' rights seems to have got ratcheted again based on a leak from an unpublished document (was it the political declaration?) in the FT I think. Kwasi Kwarteng denied it, but clearly there is an effort underway to reel those Labour MPs back in.

[Chaircat Meow]

34 minutes ago, Ser Hedge said:

This would be my understanding as well from what I've read so far, but in the last couple of days workers' rights seems to have got ratcheted again based on a leak from an unpublished document (was it the political declaration?) in the FT I think. Kwasi Kwarteng denied it, but clearly there is an effort underway to reel those Labour MPs back in.

He gets the WAB through with just 8-9 Labour MPs I think, and 4 are pretty much a certainty, i.e. Fitzpatrick, Flint. So there is very little room for error if you hope to stop the WAB by shoring up Labour's collapsing phalanx. 

[Ser Hedge]

35 minutes ago, Chaircat Meow said:

He gets the WAB through with just 8-9 Labour MPs I think, and 4 are pretty much a certainty, i.e. Fitzpatrick, Flint. So there is very little room for error if you hope to stop the WAB by shoring up Labour's collapsing phalanx. 

Since the govt seem to be prioritising a GE over bringing another programme motion for the WAB (if you ignore the rhetoric of asking the WAB be passed before the GE - which seems to be an opening negotiating position, it feels like they will take a simple one line GE bill as long not amended to lower voting age or extend to EU citizens), is your read they basically don't want to take the risk of the WAB passing but being amended significantly? (as opposed to the WAB voted down)

[Chaircat Meow]

4 hours ago, Ser Hedge said:

Since the govt seem to be prioritising a GE over bringing another programme motion for the WAB (if you ignore the rhetoric of asking the WAB be passed before the GE - which seems to be an opening negotiating position, it feels like they will take a simple one line GE bill as long not amended to lower voting age or extend to EU citizens), is your read they basically don't want to take the risk of the WAB passing but being amended significantly? (as opposed to the WAB voted down)

Cummings wants the election pre-Brexit for a variety of reasons, Julian Smith and the One Nation group want to get the WAB through first.

My view is no one really knows what will happen with the WAB if it is brought back. The Financial Times calculates the majority for an unamended WAB is +3, and two pro-WAB votes will be lost, at least temporarily, because John Mann is going to the Lords and the Tories need to send someone to take Bercow's place among the speakers. So that's a majority of +1, so if Philip Hammond feels like being a hero, well …

My guess though is if there is no viable alternative to passing the WAB, i.e. no way of moving on/breaking this paralysis, it will eventually get voted for, even if takes time and maybe another extension. FWIW Stephen Bush at the New Statesman thinks this Parliament will eventually pass the WAB and he has his ear pretty well to the ground.

However, for Boris Brexit is just a means of getting what he wants, namely a good innings as PM. And for that he needs a stable majority. If he thinks a pre-Brexit election will give him a greater chance of this than a post-Brexit election it is rational for him to go for it, even if it involves the risk Brexit will be lost (O woe). As we have seen, the election is in the opposition's gift, as without the DUP he has no majority even for a one line bill overriding the FTPA. And it may be if the WAB goes through the opposition refuse to come out to play, and Boris can't get an election until his ratings slump as people see 'Get Brexit Done' was just a big con. So you could see the offer of an election now as a ploy to smoke out some Remainer battalions from their fortifications; he's offering them a chance to stop Brexit in return for giving him a chance to get his majority. 

Back to the WAB: I see one possible fly in the ointment if he tries to push it through, namely the amendment to ensure Parliament can vote to extend the transition period. The transition period goes automatically up until the end of 2020, but the UK can, in July 2020, have it extended for a further two years. Now, this is apparently a redline for the ERG, or at least some of them. However, it is possible 4-5 Indie Tory votes and one or two Labour pro-deal votes will be lost if Boris does not promise to extend the transition. If he does this though he may lose an equivalent number of ERG votes. So the WAB would fail when the vote on this amendment crystallises this conflict.

Of course you might say it doesn't matter, this Parliament won't be in being in July 2020 and no Parliament can bind its successor but as I said above we actually don't know that. If Boris can't convince people the transition period will be extended this could give Corbyn and the other opposition parties all the excuse they need to keep prolonging this Parliament even if the WAB goes through. This brings out the problem, this Parliament might vote for the exit terms but it won't agree to give Boris a freehand in the next phase. Yet he can't get rid of it until May 2022 unless it agrees to go and why would it if Brexit is done and Corbyn's rating are terrible and it can still fight him over the transition period.

So, maybe it makes more sense to roll the dice, and lure out the Remainers by offering the prize of No Brexit.

If this works we're fucked, if it fails it will be the ultimate Classic Dom.

[Ser Hedge]

Great analysis @Chaircat Meow

 

13 hours ago, Chaircat Meow said:

So, maybe it makes more sense to roll the dice, and lure out the Remainers by offering the prize of No Brexit.

It's possible though that the SNP and Lib Dems have come forward to break the deadlock for other reasons.

With Labour in an internal deadlock and effectively useless as the main opposition party, the LibDems probably see an opening to increase their seats in Parliament and even if they are still only the third biggest party upstage Labour with a more coherent message. I'm not sure their main aim is to stop Brexit anymore, if the WAB passes and we leave end of next year, they are going to blame everything that happens on Brexit  and keep campaigning for revoke.

Otherwise, why not try a second ref once more when the DUP have flipped and you have so many indy Tories? (Not to mention resignations) It should have been worth a try.

The SNP probably see this as the best route to indyref#2 - a road that in turn leads through Brexit.

So, we might actually have a few tactical Brexiteers now even if their long term aim is re-join (in part or whole).

While the DUP are now tactical remainers as the lesser evil.

 

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

The EU may have fully approved an extension by late tomorrow or early Tuesday.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-delay/eu-hopes-to-endorse-brexit-delay-to-january-31-with-earlier-departure-possible-sources-idUKKBN1X60QI

[Chaircat Meow]

22 hours ago, Ser Hedge said:

Great analysis @Chaircat Meow

 

It's possible though that the SNP and Lib Dems have come forward to break the deadlock for other reasons.

With Labour in an internal deadlock and effectively useless as the main opposition party, the LibDems probably see an opening to increase their seats in Parliament and even if they are still only the third biggest party upstage Labour with a more coherent message. 1 I'm not sure their main aim is to stop Brexit anymore, if the WAB passes and we leave end of next year, they are going to blame everything that happens on Brexit and keep campaigning for revoke.

2 Otherwise, why not try a second ref once more when the DUP have flipped and you have so many indy Tories? (Not to mention resignations) It should have been worth a try.

3 The SNP probably see this as the best route to indyref#2 - a road that in turn leads through Brexit.

So, we might actually have a few tactical Brexiteers now even if their long term aim is re-join (in part or whole).

While the DUP are now tactical remainers as the lesser evil.

 

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

The EU may have fully approved an extension by late tomorrow or early Tuesday.

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-eu-delay/eu-hopes-to-endorse-brexit-delay-to-january-31-with-earlier-departure-possible-sources-idUKKBN1X60QI

I think this is wrong. I see this as a sincere attempt by the Liberals (and SNP actually) to win the Brexit war for Remain. 

1) If the WAB passes we are out of the EU a month later. You can't then revoke, you have to apply again for membership. Remain becomes Rejoin. It will involve different terms and can be vetoed by any member state (and likely would be, by France). This will not be as popular as Remain.

2) The reason they are not trying for a 2nd ref is because they don't think the numbers are there for it and that it is substantially more likely Parliament passes the WAB than supports a 2nd referendum. I think this calculation is probably right. This was not true before Boris got his deal, as the Indie Tories may have eventually gone for a 2nd referendum to stop no deal, as would some Labour rebels. Boris getting the deal changed that. 

3) I have given up trying to figure out which Brexit outcome makes Scexit (to which I am strongly opposed) more likely. You can argue it various ways. Maybe hard Brexit makes it too impossible and messy, or maybe Remain and the defeat of Brexit makes repeating a similar procedure very unappealing to swing voters (likely I think). I would say if British Remain parties win a narrow majority in an election they can't let Scotland leave as they almost certainly will be depending on Scottish votes to check the Brexiteers.