It seems almost certain that the government will announce legislation to abandon the Brexit Northern Ireland protocol in the next few days.
No coherent lawyer I have yet noted has suggested that this is anything but a breach of international law.
The Attorney General has suggested parliament is supreme in the UK and can as a result legislate as it wishes, which rather misses the point, which is that this is about international and not domestic law. I am not also sure that I agree that parliament can legislate to break law.
Standing a little back from Tory self interest, which I very much doubt the Attorney General did, this move is almost impossible to justify. There are three reasons.
The first is that it was not any old government that signed this Protocol. It was Boris Johnson's that did so as part of its “oven-ready” Brexit. There is no one else to blame but themselves if this deal is wrong. No one, whatever they might now claim, forced them to do so. And the deal was face up on the table. They are breaking their own law.
Second, the UK's reputation will be shredded, even further, as a result. This will not just be in the EU. Washington will be livid about this.
Third, there will be a trade war, which will be incredibly one sided. The UK now has no effective border checks with the EU. Anything, including all smuggled goods, are waved through ports and no duties are paid, even if owed if the importer decides not to make a declaration. But the EU, unlike us, got its Brexit ducks in a row and has effective border controls. As a result it can impose sanctions on the UK, and no doubt will.
This is the last thing we need in the UK as recession bites. Our economy can only be hit harder still by the cost this will impose on exporters, when these are already down.
And then there is the cost in Ireland.
How did we end up with these bandits in charge?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Ironic that they talked about taking back control of the borders – but presumably they only wanted to stop people- not smuggled goods like drugs and other prohibited items !
But not all people, the Tier 1 Investor Visa was only ended recently.
Meanwhile Mr and Mrs Sunak were, respectively, pretending to be residents of the USA and India. Perfectly acceptable.
We know how we got here:
1) They out spent the opposition by making promises to vested interests who funded them.
2) They had outside help (Russia and God knows who else).
3) They pretended to be something they are not – a Conservative Party. Instead of being a bunch of Trotsky entryists bogeymen, we got a bunch of anarchic neo-liberal market fundamentalists.
4) They have lied all the way through about their intentions and still do.
5) They have been pro-active at consolidating their position at every step – the FTPA for example now leading to further entrenchment via making protest illegal.
6) They are proponents of Fascism and use every fascist technique in the fascist play book. Say what you like about Fascism but it is effective as some members of the population find it attractive.
7) Weakened opposition – the main party – Labour – is riven with disagreement and may well be infiltrated by the market fundamentalists too. The same with the Lib Dems and the Greens might need looking at too.
As you’ve said before – there has been a coup. And as much as it repulses me, it’s been a very good one.
The real answers to all of this by the way are very unpalatable indeed.
ABC – anyone but Corbyn. We had two chances to avoid this disaster and fluffed them both.
Unplatable. Quite right. The serious, comic novel, Pest Control by Bill Fitzhugh, comes to mind.
I have no idea how anyone could have voted this bunch in. Appointment to cabinet was based simply on whether the candidate was a Brexiter, not whether they were competent. ‘The evil men do lives on after them’. Certainly true of this awful government, and they are doing quite a lot of it.
The simple answer to your last question Richard is, the UK media.
The ruling establishment’s three most important power bases are the Tory party, the City of London and the UK media, and the most important of these is the UK media.
In the 1950s Tory newspapers and non-Tory newspapers were bought and read by approximately equal numbers of people. However, by 2017 the ratio was 7 : 1 in favour of Tory newspapers. Arguably the most important fact in British politics that is never discussed by the UK media.
Why this has happened is a difficult question, but I would suggest it is mostly the symbiotic nature of the relationship between right-wing newspapers and right-wing Tory governments plus the complete inability of the left and centre of British politics to recognise or understand, let alone deal with the threat.
In an age of rapidly declining newspaper coverage and the dominance of Internet newspaper readership it should not matter but in reality it does.
Under constant attack from the Tories and right-wing media our Broadcast media and Social media still follow whatever agenda the Newspapers say is news, no matter how dishonest. Look no further than how Beergate was confected to blot out Johnson’s election disaster for a classic example.
He may be the nearest thing we have to Dr Evil but the power Rupert Murdoch has achieved in Australia, the UK and the USA is the wonder of the age.
And that, I believe, is how it has come to this.
Spot on, Paul.
And the media built up Nigel Farage. Here is a man who expressed his admiration for Steve Bannon, who edited Breibart, ran Trump’s election campaign and is now indicted for a party in the storming of the Capitol. I had a look at Breibart soon after the referendum and saw Farage thinking them for their help is securing the vote to leave.
Farage went on to campaign for Roy Moore In Alabama (who proved too toxic even for a deep red state). Moore said Obama was born outside the US, is against abortion, gun control and LGBT people. In fact almost every reactionary cause.
The Brexit party ( or I prefer to call it the Billionaire proxy party ) drew votes Labour but did not contest Conservative seats. There is ‘dark money’ behind these entities -well explained by George Monbiot.
Those who call this a ‘coup’ are right.
Peter Geoghegan’s book democracy for sale is excellent on explaining the dark money moving through politics right now.
Mr Langston,
“In the 1950s Tory newspapers and non-Tory newspapers were bought and read by approximately equal numbers of people. However, by 2017 the ratio was 7 : 1 in favour of Tory newspapers. Arguably the most important fact in British politics that is never discussed by the UK media.”
I would merely add that the influence goes further. Politics and ‘news’ is istablished in Britain, on a daily basis by an “Agenda”. The Agenda establishes the terms of most public debate or discussion on a rolling, daily basis. The Agenda is led principally by Conservative biased tabloid and broadsheet press. Perhaps the most powerful influence of the Agenda-setting press is, however less direct.
The Agenda set by Conservative-friendly press almost invariably establishes the Agenda for the licensed broadcast media, because the press represents the established, ‘bell-weather’, the measuring insturment of so-called ‘free independent’ opinion in Britain, for broadcasters. The licensed broadcasters, especially licensed terrestrial broadcasters are reluctant to set an Agenda different from the conventional norms of the British Press, because it provides the only suppoed test of Agenda impartiality. It seems absurd when it is presented as an argument, but I invite you to reflect on the real political pressures on licensed broadcasters.
‘bellwether’. Oops!
It is clear that international law has been broken so any “solution” must be by international consent. Biden will not stand for it and Johnson will give way to his ultimate master. I suspect many Tories will not be happy bunnies either.
the electorate voted for them at democratic elections. Hopefully the electorate vote in sir kier in 2024
There was some minister on a news programme last night (may have been Newsnight) going on about wanting a negotiated solution. WTF were all those meetings over the last few years if not a negotiation? It was discussed, it was agreed, it was signed.
And people voted for this shower of wotsit and will still vote for them. In the words of Ted Hastings – Jesus, Mary and Joseph and the wee donkey
Craig
“How did we end up with these bandits in charge?”
Conservative Friends Of Russia was set up in 2012. It is a Russian influence group. The Conservative party now exists to implement Russian strategic goals. Leaving the EU was just the start.
The electorate voted to leave the EU democratically.. if you recall the entire establishment favoured remain. That included all the political parties, virtually every leading economic think tank and the murdoch media group. Farage was out there on his own… i voted remain and i don’t like Farage but i admired his tenacity and his achievement against the odds.
You forget to mention that the election was corrupt and involved Russian money….
what was corrupt about the referendum exactly, facts not conjecture? Obviously Russian money is now a red flag, that obviously hasn’t always been the case with many investing in russia or benefiting from it’s economy. Indeed you yourself got paid to appear on Russian state TV.
The referendum went against the way i voted. And it is fact as i say the entire political and economic establishment and pretty much the entire mainstream media were in favour of staying. The electorate voted the other way. Take it on the chin as i have many times.
The Electoral Commission report is a good place to start…
Go search
And look at the work of Carole Cadwallader
No, the referendum result (a very narrow one) was obtained through a decades long campaign of brazen lying and propaganda by the liars behind it who fooled just enough of a badly informed, politically disillusioned electorate (in England at least) to get a ‘victory’.
And you are lying too, you voted to leave as the tone of your post makes very clear. Farage was most certainly not out on his own, he was supported by most of the newspapers, especially the Murdoch press. The pretence by leaveliars that they were an oppressed minority bravely fighting Goliath is risible.
My answer to this has two parts, the second of which is to answer Richard’s question.
Firstly, the government is as usual, lying. A contributor on WH who was involved in drawing up the GFA said the alledged threat to it from the DUP refusing to join the power sharing executive has been greatly exaggerated. So Johnson’s attempted justification for kowtowing to the DUP refusing to join the power sharing administration is a lie.
Secondly, Braverman is a Leave ideologue and therefore not a proper person to be in the job of Attorney General. This was written about Braverman by Joshua Rozenberg in The Critic in November 2020:
“Many of those who responded contrasted Cherry, who became a QC in 2009 after some 20 years’ practice as an advocate in Scotland, with Braverman, who practised as a barrister for 10 years and whose promotion to Queen’s Counsel in February followed automatically when she became attorney general. Unlike Cherry, my followers insisted, Braverman was not a “real QC”. Surprised?
If someone can tell me who was the source of this latest ‘advice’ I’ll look them up. My bet is that as an anti EU fanatic she couldn’t stomach the initial legal advice (the correct one) that they can’t overwrite the NIP, so she took ‘advice’ from a tame leave supporting QC who supplied the legal opinion she wanted. As you say Richard, “No coherent lawyer I have yet noted has suggested that this is anything but a breach of international law.” In other words, Braverman is lying about this being legally acceptable. Again, surprised?
So now Truss is trying on more bullshit and bluster with the EU, presumably to try and appeal yet again to right wing press and the deluded fools who still support this hopeless government. Who won’t give in to this nonsense. They’ll call the government’s bluff this time. And then what?
As to how we ended up with this bunch of bandits? English politics I’m afraid.
FPTP combined with a media that will support the tory party no matter what and attack it’s opponents relentlessly in it’s attempts to keep them in power. A mostly uninterested electorate combined with a ‘serf’ mentality in abot 30% of the electorate who support the tories no matter how bad they are. And Labour’s factionalism and tribalism that mean it spends half it’s time fighting itself and the other half refusing to cooperate with other parties to stop the tories getting their wholly undeserved majorities.
Truss is clearly looking for the PM’s job and trying to impress ERG et al /the Brady bunch etc..
Of course. No attempt to do the job of Foreign Secretary correctly which would involve:
(a) Telling the DUP to accept the result of the election, stop sulking, and get on with making the NI administration work. Point out to them that they wanted to leave the EU and the NIP is the result of this.
(b) Seek the best possible relationship with the EU who have actually made a pretty serious effort to engage with any problems the NIP has caused, whilst being adament that it’s existence is something the UK government itself signed up to.
What REALLY makes me mad about all of this is that in truth this isn’t a NI issue but a border issue for the WHOLE of the UK. The minister for Brexit Opportunities (!!) has said that implementing the very expensive border between the EU and UK (rather than just waving everything through as they are doing) would be an “act of self harm” . The problem for NI is that the the government can’t just wave everything through because NI has a border with the EU. So the REAL problem here is the border the Brexiteers have put up around the WHOLE of the UK not just NI. In fact NI is in a better position than the rest of the UK because NI (who voted REMAIN) are still in the SM and have an open border to the EU. Thus most in NI are quite happy trading with the rest of the EU and by-passing the UK as most of the EU will do if the UK ever commit the act of self harm and implement a border. So to allow this be argued as a NI issue is appalling because this is a border issue which impacts the WHOLE of the UK. Yes the DUP HATE the fact that NI voted REMAIN and are making the most of still being able to trade openly with the EU and avoiding the rest of the UK but this is very much a Brexit border issue that the government should be FORCED to address instead of the media simply supporting the view that ONLY NI is suffering an economic consequence of a hard Brexit.
I suppose we can blame Jeremy Corbyn for all this. If just about anyone else had been Labour leader, the Parliamentary Lab Party, plus the Lib Dems, plus plus a few Tories plus the SNP and PC would have been sufficiently coherent to have ensured one of the more sensible Leave deals was chosen.
As it was they largely preferred ABC and the alternative of a hard Leave and a hard right Tory government. The second referendum, or the Lib Dems revoke, policies were never going to do anything other than return BJ to government even though everyone knew the “oven ready” phrase was nothing more than an electoral slogan.
Corbyn chose to sit Brexit out – thinking it was ‘blue on blue action
I was told this in March 2016 sitting in Portcullis House
I agree. It was a blue on blue action, but it could I am sure that it could have been played better by the opposition to the Tories.
But whatever, he had made a fatal political miscalculation, which his enemies capitalized on.
I don’t understand the ‘blue on blue’ comment. Does the blue refer to the Tories or is it a reference to firing on one’s own side?
Anyone who knows the Labour electorate, as I’m sure JC does, will appreciate that it largely comprises the traditional working class, who might well be economically to the left but are mainly socially conservative, and also the more liberally minded of the middle classes. The former are more likely to be Leavers . The Brexit conflict has had dire implications for this alliance.
The only possible policy, to maintain this alliance, was the one successfully presented to the electorate by Labour in 2017. This would almost certainly have resulted in a much less severe Brexit deal had Labour been successful. The Labour Right has to accept its share responsibility for the result and for failing to fully support the party during the election campaign.
The suggestion was it was Tories firing on Tories
Yes I thought you meant that. As it has turned out, it’s more like “Red on Red” given the present split within the Labour Party which is, IMO, responsible for the poor set of election results. KS is obviously doing his best to claim otherwise but, outside Wales, they haven’t been good. Even London wasn’t the success story claimed. Yes there were three councils won but there were another three which were lost.
Further to my post above about Braverman:
“Some lawyers have backed the government’s plans for a bill to override the protocol. They include Martin Howe, the chair of the pro-Brexit group Lawyers for Britain.
In a Telegraph article last month, he wrote: “The EU must be brought to recognise that no sovereign and independent state can long tolerate a part of its territory being subject to foreign courts and laws. The EU would understand that once the bill became law they would lose the power to continue to impose the protocol.”
Peretz said this was a minority view among lawyers. He said: “If the advice is all about the conditions for exercising article 16, this is something the government might arguably be able to run. As to whether there’s an argument for simply ditching parts of the treaty on the basis that the text isn’t binding on the UK any more, that’s much more difficult. And I think there’s general agreement about that.”
He added: “I have no idea the extent to which the government has hawked around the bar until it found a lawyer who is prepared to say what it wants. But that’s possible.”
Mr Peretz is, I quote, “George Peretz QC, a barrister who specialises in EU law”.
Exactly as I thought. The function of an attorney general is to give the government the best possible advice, not display mindless partisanship.
When Conor Burns waved that thick pile of paper, moaning that this was what exporters from the UK to N Ireland now have to deal with, he unwittingly scored something of an own goal.
He perfectly illustrated what EU-UK importers and exporters now have to cope with, NI being effectively in the EU for trade.
Not exactly that bonfire of red tape that they promised – more a whole bondage dungeon of red tape to tie business up with. Not surprising that trade has suffered.
Precisely
And this is the POINT isn’t it, this is not just about NI but about the border around the whole of the UK and if the media could just FOCUS on this FACT rather than make this all about NI then THE people of the UK might just start to get why Brexit is , as Rees-Mogg finally admitted, an ‘act of self harm’. The only reason the rest of the UK isn’t suffering as it could be is because gov.uk are still waving EVERYTHING in from the EU but they can’t do this between the UK and NI because NI has a border with the EU. The issue is the border around the whole of the UK making it easier for NI to trade with the EU rather than with the UK.
Irrespective of the current situation there was always a major weakness in the GFA in that it locked Northern Ireland into Sectarian Politics, that part at least should have had some sort of ‘Sunset’ clause.
In 1997 no border was the strength
The border is now the issue in the sense that sectarian politics remains is still systemically embedded in NI politics
I remember in the early 90’s working in Customs and Excise and how pleased businesses were that we were fully joining the Single Market and they no longer had to complete Customs declarations. As Robin Stafford says the paperwork UK exporters have to complete is a disincentive to trade with EU, and Rees-Mogg’s deferral of proper import controls yet again just demonstrates how damaging the Tory Brexit is.
I promise you, business was very pleased
I was in business at the time
Would anyone like to explain why a certain Tony Blair is so quiet on the Irish issue?
He pops up like the proverbial bad penny opening his trap on loads of stuff but I would actually like to hear what he has to say about this – one of his better legacies – I have to say.
Why so quiet Tone?
I recall him very clearly intervening with John Major not long ago
Dammit – he has turned up telling Starmer to lose the identity politics. And look at what passes for ‘radicalism’ instead!! Biometric gimmickry !!! Just what you need in the COLC:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/tony-blair-tells-keir-starmer-to-drop-woke-politics-and-focus-on-economy-labour
And how’s this for a shambles of a party?:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2022/may/13/wakefield-labour-executive-resigns-accusing-keir-starmer-byelection-stich-up.
As some have said here previously: this is why Johnson and the Tories endure.
Who will genuinely help us out of this morass? Clue: No-one perhaps but ourselves.
“How did we end up with these bandits in charge?”
Labourism’s* backing of FPTP = Tories in power on 43.6% vote.
* “Labourism is the name of a specific political ideology – a habit of political thought and action – that is almost unique to the British left. According to this belief, there is only one true vehicle for progressive politics, the Labour party. Trade unions have their place – to represent their members at an “industrial” level, in workplaces and on shop floors – but actual political campaigning must be delegated to the party, and the primary focus of the party must be winning elections. No other party can ever represent the working class, and any political movement that is not subservient to either unions or party is to be treated with the greatest suspicion.”
Jeremy Gilbert, Professor of cultural and political theory at the University of East London