Brexit

I have been fairly quiet for a bit because I have been struggling to say anything useful about what is going on – or perhaps, more accurately, what is not going on. You see we are living through, and in, the mother of all paradoxes: a time when everything and nothing is happening. On a day to day basis, little of moment takes place: Tory MPs huff and puff that Theresa May must be evicted from Downing Street but bicker about how and when she can be forced out. The prime minister and the leader of the opposition agree that people are fed up with all the Brexit uncertainty but their talks about a compromise are an epic of fatuousness.

Three decades after the fall of the Berlin wall, Europe is once again at a crossroads. In 1989 and the years that followed, the Soviet Union ceased to exist and Germany was unified. The newly independent, once Communist states – including my home country of Poland – embarked on the road to democracy, free markets, and the rule of law. Poland was welcomed back into the European family, and we joined the ranks of Nato. But Europe now faces a threat to its hard-won unity. The threat can be seen in the imminent departure of the United Kingdom, violent protests in France, and the rise of insurgent political parties across the continent rebelling against arbitrary power concentrated in the hands of bureaucrats in Brussels.

Nigel Farage: This BBC is ‘in denial’ Andrew Marr was joined by Nigel Farage, whose Brexit party is in strong contention to win the European elections that are now required to take place on 23rd May. One poll has even put the fledgling party polling higher than the Conservatives for elections to the UK Parliament. With this in mind, Marr chose to pursue Farage on a number of other areas, which led to the interview rapidly becoming extremely heated. Katy Balls has more on ‘the most ridiculous interview ever’: https://twitter.com/BBCPolitics/status/1127508938105057281 NF: You're just not interested are you?... This is absolutely ludicrous. I’ve never in my life seen a more ridiculous interview than this.

I see that the Lib Dems were also involved in trying to put up a joint candidate with the Greens, Renew and the ludicrous Change UK for the Peterborough by-election. This really is the tail wagging the dog. Leave the Greens aside for one moment, Change and Renew are not parties in the accepted sense of the word. Change want to change nothing and its (arriviste) members – as Rachel Johnson brilliantly demonstrated – disagree with nothing in the Lib Dem manifesto. Renew, meanwhile, scarcely exist at all. A more muscular party than the Lib Dems would have told these vaulting, arrogant dilettantes to get stuffed and hammered them at the polls.

As I walked through central Oxford at the weekend, an unfamiliar sight greeted me from the top of one of the university’s central buildings: the flag of the European Union had found its way amongst the spires. It fluttered gently in the breeze on the Clarendon Building, only yards from the Bodleian Library in the heart of the city. The flag’s arrival looked like a statement. After all, it is not customary for the university to represent a political entity on its flagpoles. At a time of continued debate across the country, the flag has been widely read as the university taking a stance on an ongoing and fractious national discussion.

At tonight’s meeting of the 1922 Committee, Graham Brady told Tory MPs that Theresa May would see the executive of the Committee next week to discuss their request for more clarity on her departure plans. He also told Tory MPs that Theresa May was committed to making progress on the withdrawal agreement bill in the near future. I understand that this means an attempt at second reading before the European Elections on the 23rd of May. Now, if you are looking for a clue as to when this second reading might be attempted, consider that next Thursday is a three line whip for Tory MPs despite the fact that all that is currently scheduled is a general debate.

In case you were in any doubt, there is zero chance of Labour and Jeremy Corbyn agreeing a Brexit deal with the Prime Minister, given that its central element is a pledge to keep the UK in the customs union till the next general election. The point is that Labour’s main criticism of Theresa May’s Brexit plan is that it is 'blind', that it makes gives no promises or commitments about the UK’s future relationship with the EU. And a pledge to keep the UK in the EU’s customs union only till 2022 would not turn blindness into perfect foresight. So May needs to commit to keeping the UK in the CU to stand any chance of an entente with Labour. Why won’t she offer that? Because to do so would split her party down the middle, and cause maximum chaos for her.

The local election results showed that both main parties are paying a price for the Brexit impasse. This, as I say in The Sun this morning, means that the cross-party talks have a better chance of succeeding than they did. Those in the talks are more optimistic than they have been about getting some kind of agreement, if not a full-blown deal. But they know that things could change very quickly. I understand that the compromise being drawn up goes as follows. The UK would initially enter into a ‘comprehensive customs arrangement’ with the European Union. This would be very similar to a customs union.