Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Sheilbh]

Dominic Raab on why workers rights and environmental regulations have been removed from the (legally binding) Withdrawal Agreement because they're so important they need to be worked out separately.

I hope Labour MPs are perspicacious enough to see through this blatant bullshit.

Everyone seems confident that the deal has the votes. It is remarkable that if Theresa May had presented this deal Johnson and the ERG would have attacked it as a wet, weak betrayal of Brexit - but here we are. Labour will support a second referendum amendment (as will the rest of the opposition), but it will probably fail.

There's lots more talk thatthe Bill may be amended to basically mandate the UK government to seek to remain/join the customs union as part of the future arrangements agreement.

[Sheilbh]

Interesting on the unionist anger about this deal.

Grassroots loyalists think this Brexit deal is a sell-out. That's why tensions are running so high
Henry Patterson
Among working-class Northern Irish unionists there is little support for the plan the DUP was forced to reject


A mother and daughter wait for the start of the annual Orange march on 12 July 2018 in Belfast. Photograph: Charles McQuillan/Getty Images

There has been much talk of late about Irish "border communities" being threatened by a hard border. But not about border unionist communities, which by and large have been ignored by visiting camera teams and have a completely different narrative, while talk of a hard border has a less negative ring in their ears.

The reason is simple and it is summed up by the common use of two terms by border unionists to describe the IRA campaign and the role that they see the Irish Republic to have played during the Troubles: "ethnic cleansing" and "safe haven".

Many border Protestants were driven from their homes to safer towns. Border security installations did not exist in 1969 – they were built to try to control the IRA's use of the border as a means to bring in men and explosives to Northern Ireland from the relative haven of the republic; to escape after attacks in the north; and as somewhere to plan operations and manufacture explosives and weapons. (In 1988, the British army believed 10 of the IRA's main active service units were based in the republic.)

The Irish state used the British desire for security cooperation to gain the political concessions in the Anglo-Irish agreement in 1985. Some in Leo Varadkar's government pursued a similar strategy by talking up dissident attacks near the border as a product of Brexit when they are nothing of the kind. They predated Brexit and even if Brexit does not happen, they will continue.

All this provides context for the Democratic Unionist party's rejection of the revised withdrawal agreement, perplexing some observers of unionist politics who point out it had already accepted regulatory alignment with the EU. (Which held out the prospect of divergence over time from the rest of the UK.)

The clue to the DUP's problems with Brexit lies in the party's class politics. Although its critics had portrayed it as a proponent of a hard Brexit, this missed divisions and nuances – the DUP's initial support for Brexit lacked much of the ideological fervour of the members of the European Research Group. As it supplanted the Ulster Unionist party during the peace process, its earlier, largely working-class appeal was widened to include the Protestant middle and business class. It was well aware of the opposition to Brexit of much of this business community. However, it was also acutely conscious that many working-class loyalists, who had not rated membership of the EU as high on their list of priorities, reacted to the referendum by integrating Brexit into a vision of unionist retreat and loss during the peace process.

Despite the collapse of the republican movement's revolutionary project and Sinn Féin's acceptance of the principle of consent, a substantial section of the loyalist working class believes that republicans have turned a military defeat into a political and ideological victory. This they have done through a cultural war on issues such as flags and emblems, Orange parades and, most importantly, the "inquiry culture" into the legacy of the Troubles and what is seen as the rewriting of history. This is now manifest in the profoundly different narratives on Brexit and the border.

The focus of the Irish government and the EU on the danger to the peace process of a hard border produced an upsurge of media and publishing interest in the Irish border past and present. As the author of a book on the role played by the border during the Troubles, I followed this coverage with interest but also with some concern at its onesidedness.

Typical was a visit last April to the border near Derry by a delegation of senior US politicians led by the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi. Richard Neal, one of the congressmen, claimed that the last time he was on the border, 30 years earlier, his bus was stopped and searched by heavily armed British soldiers. Brexit, he implied, meant a clear and present danger to the peace process and the danger of a return of the "bad old days".

Why the soldiers were there was not explained, but implicit was acceptance of a longstanding Irish nationalist narrative about the border as a mutilation of the island, imposed and maintained by imperial might. A similar point was made by Varadkar when last year he circulated among EU leaders a copy of an Irish newspaper featuring the story of an IRA bombing of the Newry customs office in 1972 in which nine people were killed. Any customs controls on the island of Ireland risked the return of such devastating incidents.

Nevertheless, in the pursuit of Brexit before the end of the month, and under pressure from the Benn act, Boris Johnson has conceded the core of the Irish argument and left the DUP with little choice but rejection. While Irish nationalists saw Brexit as a fundamental violation of the Good Friday agreement, now the large majority of working-class unionists who voted for Brexit will not be happy with a deal that hives off Northern Ireland from the rest of the UK. In this they have the support of Tony Blair, who opposes the deal because it puts the union at risk.

Days before the deal was announced, it was reported that loyalist paramilitary organisations were predicting protests and campaigns of civil disobedience if the British government attempted to align Northern Ireland and the republic in any customs arrangement.

Some of this may well turn out to be bluster, but the message from those in a position to know about grassroots loyalism is that it is very difficult to find anyone who supports this deal and that tensions are high. The DUP's rejection and promise of a war of attrition in the House of Commons is in part at least designed to keep a lid on this anger.

• Henry Patterson is emeritus professor of politics at Ulster University and the author of Ireland's Violent Frontier

Edit: And it is worth noting that Arlene Foster herself is from a border county. She was on a school bus bombed by the IRA and her father (in the RUC) was shot and seriously wounded, on the family farm. The family had to move from their farm to a less "border" area.

Edit: Though it's also worth noting Henry Patterson is a widely respected historian, but he is from the unionist community so....

[The Brain]

For the EU to kick the UK out

There is no mechanism for that to happen, so it seems unlikely.

[Razgovory]

1759 was the "annus mirabelis" of Great Britain.  2019 appears to be the "annus stulti" of Great Britain.

[Maladict]

1759 was the "annus mirabelis" of Great Britain.  2019 appears to be the "annus stulti" of Great Britain.

More like annus moronicus.

[Sheilbh]

Thanks!

No worries. On this and what is happening now, Lewis Goodall had a great thread.

Basically yesterday was another meaningful vote. The government want another one tomorrow. It probably won't be allowed to get that because Bercow. The house had a chance to have a MV and chose not to, it chose to pass the Letwin amendment. So bringing the MV back is vexatious - the government can't just keep presenting the same legislation to Parliament until they pass it. Additionally the Letwin amendment basically means there's no point in a MV because they have to pass the Withdrawal Agreement.

But the government doesn't have anything approaching a majority. So it might not even be able to set the timing for passing the WA. There probably aren't the votes for a referendum amendment, but there are (probably) for a customs union amendment which unites the opposition, the DUP and moderate Tories. If that passes Johnson can't accept it as it would tear apart the Tory party who think the great benefit of Brexit is more trade deals. So the government would basically drop the WA and try to get an election campaigning for this deal (plus Labour for soft Brexit + referendum, Lib Dems for revoke and Brexit Party saying this deal is a betrayal).

Separately, the government still needs to pass the Queen's Speech and it's not clear it has the votes. That's meant to be tomorrow or Tuesday. If they lose it's the first time since MacDonald and the 1924 election (and we know what that led to ), but it's technically not a confidence vote under the FTPA. But if that happens you'd expect a vote of no confidence and potential election before the WA is looked at.

[Sheilbh]

1759 was the "annus mirabelis" of Great Britain.  2019 appears to be the "annus stulti" of Great Britain.

More like annus moronicus.

Maybe. I sort of feel like Parliament's doing what it thinks is right. I think it's probably their job (especially given how both Johnson and May have approached negotiations) for them to slow it down and go through it all before deciding. Especially as it's a hung Parliament that doesn't even have a supply and confidence majority for the government.

[Duque de Bragança]

1759 was the "annus mirabelis" of Great Britain.  2019 appears to be the "annus stulti" of Great Britain.

More like annus moronicus.

Annus stultus. 

[Razgovory]

My mistake.  I thought it was genitive.

[Zoupa]

Thanks!

No worries. On this and what is happening now, Lewis Goodall had a great thread.

Basically yesterday was another meaningful vote. The government want another one tomorrow. It probably won't be allowed to get that because Bercow. The house had a chance to have a MV and chose not to, it chose to pass the Letwin amendment. So bringing the MV back is vexatious - the government can't just keep presenting the same legislation to Parliament until they pass it. Additionally the Letwin amendment basically means there's no point in a MV because they have to pass the Withdrawal Agreement.

But the government doesn't have anything approaching a majority. So it might not even be able to set the timing for passing the WA. There probably aren't the votes for a referendum amendment, but there are (probably) for a customs union amendment which unites the opposition, the DUP and moderate Tories. If that passes Johnson can't accept it as it would tear apart the Tory party who think the great benefit of Brexit is more trade deals. So the government would basically drop the WA and try to get an election campaigning for this deal (plus Labour for soft Brexit + referendum, Lib Dems for revoke and Brexit Party saying this deal is a betrayal).

Separately, the government still needs to pass the Queen's Speech and it's not clear it has the votes. That's meant to be tomorrow or Tuesday. If they lose it's the first time since MacDonald and the 1924 election (and we know what that led to ), but it's technically not a confidence vote under the FTPA. But if that happens you'd expect a vote of no confidence and potential election before the WA is looked at.

Omfg. De Gaulle was so right about GB

[The Minsky Moment]

In his most Anglophobic moments, DeGaulle would never in his wildest nightmares imagined that governance in Britain could have devolved to this.

[mongers]

In his most Anglophobic moments, DeGaulle would never in his wildest nightmares imagined that governance in Britain could have devolved to this.

Tory grandees aren't like what they used to be.

[Tamas]

Bercow continues to be a voice of reason, I will miss him.



Meanwhile, the Brexit Secretary has causally confirmed that NI businesses would have to complete exit declarations when sending goods to Great Britain.


The slow-motion collision of Leaver Britain with reality would be absolutely hilarious if I wasn't forced to live through it.

[Razgovory]

Bercow continues to be a voice of reason, I will miss him.



Meanwhile, the Brexit Secretary has causally confirmed that NI businesses would have to complete exit declarations when sending goods to Great Britain.


The slow-motion collision of Leaver Britain with reality would be absolutely hilarious if I wasn't forced to live through it.

You aren't going to be kicked out are you?  I thought you said that you going through with the citizenship process.

[Josquius]

The potential for the deportation of fellow Europeans is only the tip of the brexit shitberg.