Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[PJL]

Yeah. Though, whatever she says, May will have a majority of 12 and a honeymoon period. I'd be surprised if she didn't go for an election.

If May gets it, she won't call an election early. She's much too conservative in that respect and won't take chances.

[Sheilbh]

SDP 2?

Pro-EU Labour and Tory MPs look at forming a new centrist party
Shirley Williams, Lib Dem peer, says Remain camp must have a central role in shaping Brexit deal

Tory and Labour MPs have held informal discussions about establishing a new political party in the event of Andrea Leadsom becoming prime minister and Jeremy Corbyn staying as Labour leader, a cabinet minister has disclosed.

Senior players in the parties have discussed founding a new centrist grouping in the mould of the Social Democratic party (SDP) should the two main parties polarise, according to the minister. Talks should be taken seriously, though they are still at an early stage, according to the source.

"There have been talks between Labour and Tory MPs about a new party," the minister said. "A number of my colleagues would not feel comfortable in a party led by Andrea Leadsom."

It is understood that MPs in both parties who campaigned to remain in the European Union believe there is an opportunity to build on the newly founded relationships between centrist MPs in both parties made before the EU referendum.

A Tory party source said Labour and Conservative MPs who campaigned in favour had become closer during the campaign and increasingly come to regard themselves as "a tribe".

"Nothing will happen until the Tory leadership election, but people are talking about this in the tearooms [in parliament]," the source said.

A senior Labour party source confirmed that at least one Conservative minister and one of the shadow cabinet ministers who resigned last week had been involved in discussions about such a reshaping of British politics.

"There is a feeling that there might have to be a new party at the centre of British politics," he said. "It's early days, but the conversations are at a pretty high level."

The suggestion comes as the Liberal Democrat peer Shirley Williams demands a central role for all pro-EU parties at Westminster in shaping the UK's relationship with the EU. She warns that, without a cross-party consensus on the final deal, the country could fall apart in bitter post-Brexit division and acrimony.

Williams, who was one of the Labour "gang of four" who broke away from Labour in 1981 to form the SDP, says that Labour under Corbyn is in disarray and unable to provide effective opposition as the UK plans for Brexit – the biggest, most far-reaching challenge for the country and Europe in a generation.

In an article in the Observer that has strong echoes of an open letter she wrote to the Guardian 35 years ago, about the Labour party's desperate plight after it voted to quit the European Community in 1981, she calls for all those on the pro-EU centre-left at Westminster to join forces with the SNP and pro-EU Tories to stamp their mark on any Brexit deal.

Their joint mission, she argues, must be to ensure that the 48.1% who voted to remain on 23 June have their share of input into the eventual deal after what was a knife-edge referendum result.

If there is not a willingness on both sides to compromise, she suggests the union with Scotland will be at an end and a rump UK will be left disunited and scarred.

Her comments reflect a growing view at Westminster that, following the 50.9% to 48.1% vote for Leave – after a campaign in which the Out camp made promises, many of which they now admit will be difficult to deliver – the views of those on the Remain side must be respected when the future of the country is determined.

Williams says the answer is for a cross-party committee to be established in parliament involving Labour, the SNP, the Lib Dems, the Greens and pro-EU Tories, which would have to approve any final deal negotiated on the UK's future EU relationship.

She writes: "With Labour in such disarray, how do we ensure that our future, long-term relationship with the European Union truly reflects the range of disparate opinion in this country, in a way that will avoid the referendum result leaving an appalling legacy of division? Over the next two years the consequences of our departure from the EU will become clear and disturbing.

"Two things are crucial. First, we must see the committed involvement of those representing all sides of the debate in the UK in the renegotiation of our long-term relationship with the EU.

"That means, secondly, that all parties represented in parliament should take part in a monitoring committee to oversee the negotiations as they proceed.

"Parties that supported staying in the EU must be part of this committee, including Labour, the SNP, the Lib Dems and the Greens, as well as the pro-Remain element of the Conservative party."

The impact of the decision to leave is only just dawning, Williams says, noting: "With every passing day, the problems confronting the new prime minister multiply."

I've been watching documentaries and reading about the SDP split and it really is striking that probably the biggest reason for it was Labour then committing to withdraw from the EC (without a referendum). It's one of many amazing echoes 45 years later

[mongers]

SDP 2.0 ?
.....
snip
....

FYP

[Josquius]

If only that bloody av referendum hadn't been bought

[fromtia]

I see that the "federal UK" is trying to get back on the agenda this morning.

[Valmy]

I see that the "federal UK" is trying to get back on the agenda this morning.

I like the sound of that. Keeping the country together but still allow for the kind of local control some of the nations desire.

But what it sounds like and what it is might be two different things

[Josquius]

Just so long as it's an actual federal uk and none of this english parliament bollocks.

[Valmy]

Just so long as it's an actual federal uk and none of this english parliament bollocks.

Wouldn't a Federal UK require an English parliament of some sort?

Of course if they were really smart they would split each of the countries into counties or shires and federalize the UK that way.

Self rule for Wigtonshire!

[fromtia]

Self rule for Wigtonshire!

Wigtonshireites will be compelled to live as the sub human dogs they are. Ever upwards to glory, Little Smegbottom on Shart!

[fromtia]

I like the sound of that. Keeping the country together but still allow for the kind of local control some of the nations desire.

But what it sounds like and what it is might be two different things

I like the idea too actually. I liked reforming the House of Lords too though, and that was a reverso cluster bomb anal fuck. Thanks Tony.

I'm wondering with all this chit chat about a neo SDP and federalism (hell, it looks like someone was talking about PR this morning) if the UK isn't steaming toward a really significant constitutional shake up. It's timely, let's be honest.

[Sheilbh]

Self rule for Wigtonshire!

I've been to Wigtonshire. Surprisingly good pizza in Wigtown.

Fully up for a constitutional convention!

[Crazy_Ivan80]

if the UK is ever federalised I hope it is done well. Cause it's not going to be that easy given that one of the nations (England) is so much bigger than all the rest. So the change for a lopsided federation is real, and that's a situation that's just as bad as a (semi-)unitary state that no one wants.

[Sheilbh]

I like the idea too actually. I liked reforming the House of Lords too though, and that was a reverso cluster bomb anal fuck. Thanks Tony.

I'm wondering with all this chit chat about a neo SDP and federalism (hell, it looks like someone was talking about PR this morning) if the UK isn't steaming toward a really significant constitutional shake up. It's timely, let's be honest.

I am intrigued

Brexit vote paves way for federal union to save UK, says all-party group
Exclusive: Proposed constitutional reform would give each nation and region of the UK full sovereignty over its own affairs
Martin Kettle
Sunday 10 July 2016 14.54 BST Last modified on Sunday 10 July 2016 16.33 BST

The governance of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should be reinvented within a new voluntary union in a bid to save the UK from disintegration, an independent all-party group of experts will argue this week.

The Constitution Reform Group, convened by former Conservative cabinet minister Lord Salisbury, is to make the the case for radical constitutional change in the UK by claiming the need has been boosted by the vote to leave the European Union.

Their proposals say the existing union should be replaced with fully devolved government in each part of the UK, with each given full sovereignty over its own affairs. The Westminster parliament, the group says, should then be reduced to 146 MPs. The individual nations and regions of the UK would then be encouraged to pool sovereignty to cover the matters they wish to be dealt with on a shared basis.

The proposals say they "start from the position that each of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland is a unit that both can and should determine its own affairs to the extent that it considers it should; but that each unit should also be free to choose to share, through an efficient and effective United Kingdom, functions which are more effectively exercised on a shared basis."

The new construction suggests a complete reversal of the UK's current constitutional arrangement, in which all sovereignty formally rests in the centre and is then devolved to regions on a piecemeal basis.

"The time for radical change has come. This country needs a new act of union," Salisbury told the Guardian. "We are in a different world following the Brexit vote. The top-down, ad hoc approach to the structure of the United Kingdom needs to be replaced. We believe that our approach based on consent will provide a stronger union than the one that we now have and which is under challenge."

The Constitution Reform Group includes the former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell, the former Labour Northern Ireland and Wales secretary Peter Hain, the former clerk of the House of Commons Lord Lisvane, and the former Ulster Unionist politician David Burnside.

The group claims it has the support of former Conservative prime minister Sir John Major, and from the current chairman of the Conservative backbench 1922 Committee, Graham Brady. Both senior backers are significant as the Conservative party, which is so dominant in England, has often been reluctant to embrace new constitutional thinking about the union, especially if it involves federalism.

The Salisbury group's proposals have been drafted into an Act of Union bill which is due for publication this week and will be put forward as a basis for discussion.

The group hopes that debate on its proposals would allow the draft bill to be refined and improved and acquire a degree of consent that would enable a future government to secure its parliamentary passage. If adopted, the new Act of Union would come into force only if passed within 14 months by a UK-wide referendum and by majorities in each of the four component nations.

The group proposes that the shared UK functions would include the monarchy as head of state, foreign affairs, defence, national security, immigration, international treaties, human rights, the supreme court, a single currency, a central bank function, financial services regulation, income and corporation tax powers, and the civil service.

Other functions of the existing UK would be controlled by the nations and regions, creating what would in effect be a sovereignty-max solution to the national question in the UK, similar in effect to the "devo-max" proposal that has often been canvassed in Scotland.

The group says its bill "aims to preserve and codify the most important and successful features of the present system, such as the notion of mutual support and shared rights and values".

Two key questions remain unresolved, on which the Salisbury group offers alternatives. The government of England would either involve a directly elected English parliament or a continuation of the current evolution towards self-governing English city-regions. There is no proposal for the creation of English regions.

The other unresolved question is the shape, size and future of the UK parliament. Under one version, the House of Lords would be abolished and a Commons consisting of 146 MPs would be the main legislative chamber. A new, second chamber comprising delegates from the English, Scottish and Welsh parliaments and from the Northern Ireland assembly would be created. Under the alternative, the Lords would be reduced to 400 members, with 75% directly elected on a federal basis and the rest appointed.

Members of the group have made clear they are partly motivated by limiting the momentum towards Scottish independence following the 23 June vote to leave the European Union. "It would pull the rug from under independence," said Lord Hain, while Salisbury argued his proposals would hand the initiative back to unionists.

Scotland and Northern Ireland voted in favour of remaining in the EU.

[mongers]

Self rule for Wigtonshire!

I've been to Wigtonshire. Surprisingly good pizza in Wigtown.

Fully up for a constitutional convention!

South-West London do for you? 

[mongers]

A bit of an insight into A.Leadsom's character, posted by my local MP, he was once PPS to David Cameron and I think a friend.

....
have known Theresa May since 1996 when I visited Germany with her on a fact finding mission prior the abandonment of the deutschmark and adoption of the euro. She has had a successful professional and political career. She has been our longest serving Home Secretary, in the department notorious for its difficulties. I have every confidence that, if elected, she will be a strong prime minister at a time when we certainly need one. I Know Theresa politically, but I do not know her personally, having never mixed in her circle and rarely met her socially.

Andrea Leadsom, by contrast, has had a much shorter political career, and I have known as a politician for a correspondingly shorter period. I know her socially however, and I count her as a friend. We have studied the Bible together, and prayed together. These relationships count for something in politics, as they do in any other walk of life. They rise above ideology, and tribal allegiance.

Full blog post here:
http://www.desmondswaynemp.com/ds-blog/late-night-encounter-library/

Most Americans will probably not read much if anything into that.

To Brits, be afraid, very afraid.