Uk politics

Michael Gove makes a semi-persuasive case for patriotism in The Times this week. Brexit and Trumpism are largely just assertions of the basic, healthy human impulse to love one’s homeland, and to defy the international structures, and liberal sneering, that denigrate this impulse. The reality is that the moral status of patriotism depends on which nation you belong to. It depends whether your nation espouses liberal values. If it does, then your patriotism is linked to a wider-than-national creed. If it does, then your allegiance is also to an international cause: you respect and love your country as a particular expression of this creed. After fascism, the idea of national allegiance subtly shifted in the West.

Britain’s position heading into its Brexit talks is far stronger than it was a week ago, I argue in The Sun today. Why, because Donald Trump has changed the dynamics of global politics. Brexit’s critics used to claim that this country would be isolated after it left the EU. But it is hard to make that case when the president-elect of the most powerful country in the world is in favour of it. Indeed, the next US President is more enthusiastic about it than the British Prime Minister. He was for it before June 23rd. Theresa May now has a chance to create a strong relationship with Trump before other European leaders even start trying.

What worries government ministers, as I say in The Sun this morning, is not the actual vote on the Article 50 bill—voting against the bill as whole would be akin to rejecting the referendum result—but attempts to tie Theresa May’s hands ahead of the negotiation through amendments to the bill. One senior Cabinet Minister tells me that peers and MPs ‘won’t be able to resist’ trying to amend the bill. Though, it is worth noting that because of public concern about free movement there probably isn’t a Commons majority for staying in the single market, post referendum. Downing Street is adamant that they don’t want an early election, and that if they lose their appeal to the supreme court they can get this bill through clean.

As a general rule, any day the government loses in court is a good day. So yesterday was an especially fine day. A delicious one, too, obviously, in as much as the fist-clenched, foot-stamping, whining of so many Brexiteers was so overblown and ludicrous it toppled into hilarity. People who shouted for months about the urgent need to restore parliamentary sovereignty now reacted in horror to the restoration of parliamentary sovereignty. 'That's not what we meant', they spluttered. We meant governmental supremacy only when it suits us. Well, tough. A certain amount of squealing was only to be expected since, if Nigel Farage has taught us anything, it is that the Brexit-minded really don't like it up 'em. But, still.

Being an out-and-proud Brexiteer, someone who would go to the barricades for Brexit, someone who might even take a bullet for Brexit, I often get emails from people who feel the same way but feel they can’t express their Brexitphilia in public. This week, in response to my Big Issue column on, yes, the beauty of Brexit, a correspondent tells me that, like me, he voted Leave for liberal, democratic reasons, not Little Englander ones, but such has been the ‘name-calling’ and ‘toxicity’ in response to his decision that he's had to slink off social media and keep his head down. It’s awful.

Quite a few MPs are driven by a strange need for validation, but Zac Goldsmith might be the first politician in history to ask his constituents to vote for him three times in two years. Once as Mayor (the less said about that tawdry campaign the better) and, it seems, twice as MP for Richmond Park. He always said he’d resign and trigger a by-election if the Government approved Heathrow, as it did this morning. Originally his threat had force because Richmond was a Tory-Lib Dem marginal and his resignation would mean that the Tories would probably lose a seat. It was Richmond’s way of saying to the Tories: 'Yes, we’ll vote for you – but only if people like Cameron and Theresa May are being honest about their opposition to a third runway.

'Downing Street says the PM is set to rebuff calls for a flexible Brexit, which would allow parts of the UK to have their own arrangement,' said the BBC radio news this morning. Not quite. This notion has been rejected in Europe, where the idea of doing some kind of separate deal with Scotland or any constituent part of the UK was never a deal. The 'options' that the SNP talk about do not exist as far as the EU is concerned: it is a giant bluff. It's far from clear why she is asking Theresa May for something that the EU has already rejected.

Suzanne Evans, former deputy chairman of Ukip, has announced her intention to run for the leadership of the party. 'I think I'm the right person to lead Ukip into the challenges ahead,' she told Andrew Marr, adding, 'first and foremost, I think I'm absolutely the right person to champion the cause of those 17.4 million people who voted to leave the European Union.' Nigel Farage's former deputy, Paul Nuttall, also announced his intention to run telling Andrew Neil that he would 'stand on a platform of the unity candidate – Ukip needs to come together.' [embed]https://youtu.be/EKpAs4FTKmA[/embed] Evans and Nuttall are the latest candidates to join a field that includes Raheem Kassam, Farage's former spin doctor and now a blogger for Breitbart UK.

The French are trying to seduce the British to come and work in Paris. A video hymns the delights of La Defense, the Gallic Canary Wharf. It is a healthy Brexit effect that the French now feel that they can no longer fight the City of London solely by trying to regulate it, and must try persuasion instead. The prospect of British departure reawakens the spirit of competition in a continent which had largely replaced it with bureaucracy. By leaving, Britain ought to win first-mover advantage in this contest, but even if we don’t, we will have done a service to our neighbours which we could never have managed if we had voted to stay.

As part of its preview of Tim Shipman's keenly-anticipated Brexit book, the Sunday Times today reveals draft article written by Boris Johnson intended to make the case for his voting to stay in the EU. The existence of such an article was known, and a lot of his enemies thought it would expose him as a fraud. In fact, the article (full thing here) reads like an advert for Brexit with a pathetic "but I'm still going to back Cameron" bolted on to the end. It purports to balance both arguments, but weighs in far more favourably for Brexit. It's not the first time he describes the case for remaining (he revealed his agony in the Daily Telegraph on 7 Feb). So what's new?

A Brexit deal that would end free movement and see UK goods able to access the EU market without tariffs or the need to jump through any additional hoops sounds, superficially, attractive. These arrangements could also be in place by the 2020 general election, as I say in my Sun column. But this idea of leaving the EU single market, but staying in the customs union is a bad one—however keen some in the Treasury and Whitehall are on it. For if Britain remains in the customs union, then it can’t do proper trade deals with non-EU countries. Instead, it will have to continue to apply the EU’s Common External Tariff. This is designed to protect the EU’s most politically sensitive industries: imposing a 10 percent tariff on cars, an 11.