Brexit

The EU referendum result was relatively narrow. 52/ 48 per cent is a very different result from 55/ 45 per cent or 60/ 40 per cent. In these circumstances, seeking some kind of compromise to try and unite the country seems sensible. But the problem is that while there is a coherent case for leaving the EU and a coherent one for staying in, it is hard to see what the coherent case is for leaving the EU only to become a permanent member of the EEA and stay in a customs union with the EU. A compromise along these lines would satisfy nobody. It wouldn’t deal with the sovereignty

Boris Johnson’s rather bold move on the customs partnership hasn’t yet landed him in trouble, even though it has enraged some of his pro-Remain colleagues. At the Number 10 lobby briefing today, the Prime Minister’s spokesman avoided giving the Foreign Secretary a slap down when asked whether Theresa May was happy that he had told the Mail that the customs partnership plan was ‘crazy’. Instead, the spokesman used the sort of formula of words that declines to offer any sort of comment on anything at all: ‘There are two customs models that were first put forward by the government last August, and most recently they were outlined in the Prime

Theresa May has received a shot in the arm from the local election results. But, as I say in The Sun this morning, she still needs to deal with the whole customs partnership question. Even after the remarkable rebuff that the ‘new customs partnership’ received from the Brexit inner Cabinet on Wednesday, despite the Prime Minister putting her authority on the line by making clear her support for it, Number 10 won’t give up on the idea. It believes that with a few changes it can be made to work. Already, ministers are being told that what really matters is getting out of the EU. The case is being made

As time passes, some things become clear. The problem isn’t Brexit; the problem is the Brexiteers. Or, to put it slightly differently, while Brexit may be sub-optimal, the Brexiteers are much worse than that. They are awful.  Extraordinarily, Jacob Rees-Mogg is now the bookmakers’ favourite to be the next prime minister. As the champion of the backbench Brexiteers he can no longer be dismissed – or, indeed, indulged – as an enjoyable eccentric. He is serious and perhaps now merits being taken seriously himself.  As an intellectual matter, Brexit remains a respectable cause. The vision of Brexit imagined by The Spectator has much to commend it even if I think

Another day, another Brexit defeat in the House of Lords for the Government. This time around, peers have voted to back an amendment to the Brexit bill which would hand Parliament, rather than ministers, the power to decide what to do if MPs reject the final deal agreed with Brussels. The margin in today’s vote was considerable: 335 to 224. But more worrying for the Government is the number of times it has been now been defeated in the Lords on Brexit, with this afternoon’s vote marking the seventh time peers have gone against the Government on the issue. Among those who backed the amendment were 19 Tory lords, including

I am living in Paris in the unofficial role of Diplomatic Wag. Though since I am neither wife nor girlfriend, but fiancée, or, in best Franglais, la vielle balle et chaîne, I have been searching for a new acronym. Foho (Foreign Office Hanger On)? Andy is a ‘Directeur de SIN’, a demonic job description out of C.S. Lewis’s The Screwtape Letters. SIN is the government’s Science and Innovation Network, promoting collaboration between international scientists. There is goodwill in laboratories on both sides of the Channel to go on working together post-You-Know-What. Brexit is pronounced to rhyme with Brigitte, as in Bardot. Parisians ask if you’re American or English and when you say English

The government’s opponents were not slow, as usual, to blame today’s disappointing data on economic growth on Brexit (the IOD) or ‘austerity’ (John McDonnell) – while the Chancellor, Philip Hammond, chose to fall back on that old chestnut used by corporate spokesmen when announcing dismal results: the weather. None of these will really do as an explanation as to why GDP growth, according to the ONS, plunged from a healthy 0.4 per cent in the final quarter of last year to a miserable 0.1 per cent in the first quarter of 2018. As for Brexit, GDP figures have been shrugging it off for nearly two years – the economy even

For those Brexiteers worried the government may change its mind on leaving the customs union, David Davis’s appearance in front of a select committee gave reasons for reassurance – but also possibly some cause to worry. The Brexit secretary was clear that he is sticking firmly to his guns on the issue. But can he – and the government – continue to do so under pressure from MPs who are seeking to keep Britain inside the customs union? Hilary Benn asked Davis what would happen if the vote in Parliament on the Brexit trade bill went against the government. Here’s what Davis had to say: Benn: You have emphatically rejected

Whole industries will be devastated. There will be thirty mile queues of lorries stretching back from Dover. The price of food will rocket, our farmers will be wiped out, and the IRA will be letting off bombs all over the UK as the Troubles return to Northern Ireland. With every day that passes, the scare stories about leaving the customs union are getting more and more hysterical – and the pressure is growing to stay inside. In fact, most of it is nonsense. The fifth largest economy in the world is perfectly capable of managing its own trade arrangements. But leaving needs a big sell. Why? Because there is a

Senior Cabinet Brexiteers are more concerned about the project than they have been in some time, I write in The Sun this morning. The reason for this is that there is a concerted push underway to keep Britain in a customs union with the EU for good even after December 2020. If Britain is to take full advantage of the opportunities that Brexit offers, this must be resisted. A customs-arrangements between Britain and the EU which speeds up checks, minimises bureaucracy and helps maintain cross border supply chains would be sensible, and mutually beneficial. What wouldn’t be, is a situation where the EU determines both the taxes charged on goods