Uk politics

Saturday

James Forsyth

Is the backstop vulnerable to challenge under human rights law?

The most contentious part of Theresa May’s Brexit deal are the Northern Ireland specific provisions of the backstop. These would see various EU rules and regulations apply in Northern Ireland even after the UK has left the EU. If they came into force, they would create—in some areas—a kind of regulatory border in the Irish Sea. But, as I say in The Sun this morning, these provisions might be illegal under European Human Rights law. A case in 1999 brought against the UK government, the Matthews case, at the European Court of Human Rights established that people have a right to vote in elections to the parliaments that set their

Steerpike

Revealed: Philip Hammond’s speech at DUP conference – Boris, Rees-Mogg and the backstop

With the DUP currently refusing to vote with the Tories following grievances over the proposed Irish backstop, Theresa May’s party is having to try out life as a minority government. Piling on the pressure, DUP leader Arlene Foster has told the BBC that her party would have to revisit its confidence and supply deal with the Tories permanently if May’s Brexit deal passes through Parliament. So, spare a thought for Philip Hammond. Spreadsheet Phil was given the task of being sent to DUP conference to charm attendees on behalf of the government. Mr S’s mole in the room reports that the Chancellor managed to crack a few jokes at the expense

Charles Moore

Will May’s Brexit deal stop us making jokes about Juncker?

Article 129 (3) of the withdrawal agreement provides that ‘the United Kingdom shall refrain, during the transition period, from any action or initiative which is likely to be prejudicial to the Union’s interests, in particular in the framework of any international organisation, agency, conference or forum of which the United Kingdom is a party in its own right.’ What does that mean? That we are not free at the UN Security Council to oppose any item of EU foreign policy? That we cannot cut our rate of VAT? That we must not make jokes about Jean-Claude Juncker? Needless to say, there is no reciprocal obligation on the EU to do

Friday

Andrew Willshire

Supporters of a second referendum should be careful what they wish for

The campaign for a second referendum continues to grow. On the Conservative side, nearly a dozen Tory MPs now support a ‘People’s Vote’ and if Theresa May’s deal gets voted down, this number is likely to rise further. Among Labour MPs, support is even greater; if it wasn’t for Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell, it seems safe to say that a second vote would almost certainly be Labour party policy by now, with the SNP and the Lib Dems also on board with the idea. But a question remains: have those calling for a second vote really thought about the possible consequences? It is clear that many of those campaigning for another referendum

Steerpike

Diane Abbott’s warning to second referendum supporters

Diane Abbott has a stark warning for those clamouring for a second referendum: be careful what you wish for. The Labour MP’s warning won’t go down well with those from the ‘People’s Vote’ campaign, who desperately need the support of the Labour party if their wish is to come true. On Nick Robinson’s podcast, Abbott was asked what would happen if another vote took place. Here’s what she said: ‘My view is that if we had a second referendum tomorrow, Leave would win again. And not only would Leave win again, but Leave voters would say: what didn’t you understand about Leave the first time?’ Mr S thinks Abbott is

Steerpike

Watch: Theresa May dodges Brexit deal question

Theresa May is back on the radio flogging her Brexit deal to a sceptical public. Unsurprisingly, few of those who phoned in to BBC 5 Live seemed impressed by what the Prime Minister had to offer. One listener asked the PM to tell him, without any ‘political waffle’, whether her deal is better than staying in the EU. But May’s bid to do just that didn’t exactly work out to plan. At the end of May’s minute-long answer, the host Emma Barnett asked for the caller’s verdict: EB: ‘Michael, did the PM answer your question?’ Caller: ‘No’ Emma Barnett ended the interview by asking May how she and Philip would

Katy Balls

Dominic Raab is just saying what a lot of Leave MPs are thinking

After resigning as Brexit Secretary over Theresa May’s proposed deal, Dominic Raab has restyled himself as one of the more loyal of the Brexiteer rebels. He used an appearance on the Andrew Marr show over the weekend to say that although he would note vote for the deal as it currently stands, he still backed Theresa May as Prime Minister and would vote for her in any confidence vote. This morning he is upped the ante, however, with an interview on the Today programme. Discussing both the withdrawal agreement and the future framework (which was set out on Thursday), Raab was frank in his assessment. The Tory Brexiteer said he

Steerpike

What’s in the small print of Theresa May’s “political declaration”?

Granted, it’s not another 40 horrors list but Mr Steerpike was struck by Paragraph 79 of the EU/UK Political Declaration: ‘The future relationship must ensure open and fair competition. Provisions to ensure this should cover state aid, competition, social and employment standards, environmental standards, climate change, and relevant tax matters, building on the level playing field arrangements provided for in the Withdrawal Agreement and commensurate with the overall economic relationship.’ That would suggest that the starting point for the supposedly final UK-EU trade deal relationship is… wait for it…. the backstop. The one that we’re never supposed to use. That is why Article 132 of Withdrawal Agreement both takes extension

Thursday

Robert Peston

Will May’s Brexit deal survive a vote in the Commons?

First things first. There has been a widespread misunderstanding of why Angela Merkel made it known yesterday that if the Brexit deal – Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration – wasn’t done and dusted by today, she would not be bothering to turn up in Brussels to formally ratify it on Sunday. Her conspicuous intervention was not aimed at putting pressure on Theresa May to be more emollient in the last leg of negotiations. The German Chancellor was in fact asking the likes of the Spanish premier Pedro Sanchez to stop misbehaving and causing unnecessary bother (Sanchez has been playing to a domestic audience by saying he would block any agreement

Isabel Hardman

May tries to sell her Brexit plan to the Commons – with limited success

Tory MPs offered a warmer reception to Theresa May’s statement in the Commons this afternoon than they managed during yesterday’s Prime Minister’s Questions. The Prime Minister herself seemed very confident as she explained today’s political declaration to MPs. That’s about as far as you can go when looking for signs of success in this afternoon’s Commons Brexit drama. For instance, straight after the statement, we received confirmation from Iain Duncan Smith that he and other Brexiteers do still find the Brexit deal unacceptable and will kill it in the Commons. May had only minutes before praised Duncan Smith and Owen Paterson in her statement for ideas that they’d offered for

Steerpike

Watch: Iain Duncan Smith slams May’s Brexit plan

Theresa May is in the Commons attempting to convince MPs to back her Brexit plan. But it isn’t going well. Iain Duncan Smith was particularly critical of the PM’s backstop blueprint, telling May that while he appreciated her efforts it wasn’t good enough. Here’s what he said: ‘For all of the effort and work, the reality is that this is not the withdrawal agreement, and the withdrawal agreement will make it very clear that, should we struggle with a negotiation for a free trade arrangement and not complete that process, we will fall into the Northern Ireland backstop as it exists at the moment. And that will mean we are

Theresa May

Theresa May’s Downing Street Brexit statement: full text

Throughout these difficult and complex negotiations with the European Union I have had one goal in mind: to honour the vote of the British people and deliver a good Brexit deal. Last week we achieved a decisive breakthrough when we agreed with the European Commission the terms for our smooth and orderly exit from the EU. Alongside that withdrawal agreement we published an outline political declaration setting out the framework for our future relationship. Last night in Brussels, I had a good, detailed discussion with President Juncker in which I set out what was needed in that political declaration to deliver for the United Kingdom. We tasked our negotiating teams to continue

Ross Clark

The Brexit political declaration confirms we are heading to a blind Brexit

With the leak of a 26-page political declaration this morning – an enhanced version of last week’s briefer document – we now know the shape of the future EU-UK relationship which May and the EU negotiators want to achieve in the long run – if, and this could turn out to be a big if – the UK ever manages to escape from the purgatory of the backstop. It is not a bad document in itself. Neither does it bear much of a resemblance to Chequers. The big difference is that it envisages a future trade deal which encompasses services as well as goods – Chequers envisaged Britain pretty well

Wednesday

Johannes de Jong

Technology won’t solve the Irish border question. Here’s why

Amongst some Brexiteers, there is an eternal faith in technology to solve the Irish border question. This is mistaken. Yet still the idea refuses to go away. Now Theresa May is using this belief to try and get wavering Tory MPs to back her Brexit deal with Brussels. Yesterday, the Prime Minister’s spokesman said the solution for the question of the Irish border ‘could involve technological solutions’. He went on to say: ‘I think there was discussion in cabinet about the fact that the withdrawal agreement recognises and keeps open the potential for alternative arrangements to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland.’ No 10 is implying that

Bernard Connolly

Where were the Brexit no deal warnings during the Scottish independence debate?

Four years ago, 45 per cent of Scottish voters favoured leaving the UK. Many of the warnings about the negative impact of independence on the Scottish economy were justified. But they did not extinguish a yearning for independence – and the same could be said of the EU referendum, with the caveat that this time a majority voted to leave, and many of the warnings were unjustified. An ineradicable desire to get our country back triumphed over the Project Fear campaign conducted by the Treasury and the whole of the nomenklatura that sought to preserve position, power and privilege for itself and to suppress any notion that ordinary people, in

Ross Clark

Extinction Rebellion is a wannabe Marxist revolution in disguise

Anyone trying to get about London over the past few days may have come across the activities of a group called Extinction Rebellion, which blocked Westminster and several other bridges on Saturday, blocked Lambeth Bridge today and plans to repeat the exercise later this week. Its tactics are simple – it gathers raggle-headed eco warriors, together with some terribly nice middle class students, buses them up to London and then disgorges them to sit in the middle of the road, where they then get arrested for blocking the traffic. But no matter the illegal tactics. The world is in the middle of ecological crisis, and so, of course, the normal

Alex Massie

Jeremy Corbyn is as deluded about Brexit as Jacob Rees-Mogg | 21 November 2018

Now that the coup of the plastic spoons appears to have failed – Jacob Rees-Mogg and his accomplices could not even synchronise their pocket-watches – Theresa May finds herself back where she has been all along: strengthened by her weakness. This is a remarkable situation for any prime minister but not, for May, an unprecedented one.  It helps that her enemies are so utterly incompetent. The sallow men of the European Research Group are not only not a government in waiting but not a collection of kingmakers either. Just as Voltaire quipped that the Holy Roman Empire was in fact none of these things, so we may say something similar

Lloyd Evans

PMQs: May unveils her Brexit consolation prizes

Amber Rudd, a washed-up ex-minister last week, is the de facto Brexit secretary today. She revealed her loyalties this morning when she told an interviewer that parliament wouldn’t approve a no-deal agreement. And with no deal off the table, Brussels can dictate terms. Congrats Amber. The Légion d’honneur is on its way. And a peerage too, in all probability, given that Nick Clegg was knighted for opposing Brexit. Remainer Rudd’s bombshell was raised by Jeremy Corbyn at the start of PMQs. He asked Mrs May to state whether no deal is still an option. ‘I have consistently made clear,’ began the PM, before continuing in deliberately cryptic terms. The alternatives

James Kirkup

This MP has summed up everything wrong with the transgender debate

MPs have been talking about gender and sex and the law. This is a good thing. That’s the job Parliament is there to do, after all: debate complicated, contested issues in order to decide how and if to make laws, and to make sure the country is a place where differing views and arguments can be tested. So well done to David T.C. Davies, who brought about today’s debate in Westminster Hall, and well done too to MPs such as Layla Moran, Hannah Bardell and Lilian Greenwood who took part in the debate. Some of the things that were said in the debate were sensible and thoughtful, some were not.

Isabel Hardman

Why aren’t there more women MPs?

It’s 100 years today since women were able to stand for Parliament, and the Women and Equalities Committee marked it with a hearing on the barriers to getting more female MPs. It has only been in the past few years that the total number of women ever elected into Parliament has passed the number of men currently sitting on the green benches, and 32 per cent of MPs are women. This puts the UK at 48 in the world rankings for gender representation in its Parliament, which isn’t great. I was one of those giving evidence to the Committee this morning, using research I’ve conducted for my book, Why We