Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[Tamas]

So Liz Truss wants to unilaterally suspend the NIP. Again. Which might trigger a UK/EU trade war and US diplomatic pressure. Again. With a majority in Northern Ireland for the protocol as per the latest election. And no serious attempts by London to convince Unionists to accept the protocol. Disappointing if this ineptitude by the British government leads to a fallout between UK and EU.

I think 10% inflation incoming, UK-side border controls not yet implemented, the global economy faltering, our record-long reigning monarch clearly and sadly near the end of her life, and the government's position on the NIP clearly proved to be in the minority among NI citizens, it's hard to think of a better time to start a trade war over the NIP with the EU. Not.

Hey, it should be clear enough by now: no price is too high for keeping Johnson in power.

Re. Beergate, I understand why Starmer would need to resign if received a police fine, but I find it fascinating that some people seem to think this would put Johnson under any kind of pressure. What pressure? He is long past the point where any person with any hint of dignity would resign or refuse to work with him.

[Tamas]

Meanwhile the other front to be opened is beating up anti-government protesters, with the Queen's Speech to focus on "hooligan protesters:

We have seen a number of very, very prolific, persistent offenders who decide to just flagrantly ignore the courts and so we'll be bringing in a new serious disruption prevention order which we can place on them as individuals to deter them, if you like, from this kind of hooligan way of protesting.

We believe that protest is fundamental to our democracy but it has to be balanced against the rights of others to go about their business, and indeed keeping us all safe. I'm afraid some of the tactics we've seen recently haven't done that.

[The Larch]

If it's meant to cover the guy who put a flare in his ass... 

[Richard Hakluyt]

If it's meant to cover the guy who put a flare in his ass... 

Fake news, Johnson didn't do that.

[The Larch]

If it's meant to cover the guy who put a flare in his ass... 

Fake news, Johnson didn't do that.

The party ended before he could do his favourite trick?

[Sheilbh]

So Liz Truss wants to unilaterally suspend the NIP. Again. Which might trigger a UK/EU trade war and US diplomatic pressure. Again. With a majority in Northern Ireland for the protocol as per the latest election. And no serious attempts by London to convince Unionists to accept the protocol. Disappointing if this ineptitude by the British government leads to a fallout between UK and EU.

Again indeed. Like threatening to "bring in the navy", or a bonfire of EU regulations, or the Queen's speech it's becoming one of those empty traditions that adorn the British constitution.

I take this more seriously than most of these stories because Patrick Maguire's a very good reporter. But the article is that Truss wants to do it, her officials have prepared the relevant legislation - but there's no cabinet agreement on it and, in particular, the Treasury are opposed. It's not always true, but generally in British politics - the Treasury wins. It wasn't included in the Queen's speech which sets out the government's legislative agenda for this parliament - the line was:

The continued success and integrity of the whole of the United Kingdom is of paramount importance to Her Majesty's government, including the internal economic bonds between all of its parts.

Which is pretty vague even for a Queen's speech. It all suggests to me that there's internal disputes and Truss's team are briefing this (possibly with an eye on a leadership contest).

Re. Beergate, I understand why Starmer would need to resign if received a police fine, but I find it fascinating that some people seem to think this would put Johnson under any kind of pressure. What pressure? He is long past the point where any person with any hint of dignity would resign or refuse to work with him.

I think it could put Johnson under pressure. I don't think it fundamentally changes anything and I still think the Tories will get rid of Johnson this summer - though there is always a possibility they don't and end up tying themselves to him into the next election. In particular because I think there will be a drip of new fines and then the Gray report. Also I think there'll be a normalisation, sadly, of the war in Ukraine which means it will have less impact on Tory MPs.

To me it's an obvious thing to do because he would need to resign - so he might as well pre-empt that. It let's him take the high ground a little bit, but more importantly, it allows Labour to start talking about cost of living and other issues because they won't be constantly dogged with questions about Starmer. It might have an impact on Tory MPs if it happens - that will depend on the public's response but my suspicion is they will suddenly warm to Starmer if he steps down and it will cause some poll swings that will have Tory MPs who are already on edge even more concerned.

Meanwhile the other front to be opened is beating up anti-government protesters, with the Queen's Speech to focus on "hooligan protesters:

Assume that's aimed at the Extinction Rebellion/blocking roads or tying yourself to building models of protest.

Meanwhile:

The planning system will be reformed to give residents more involvement in local development.

[The Minsky Moment]

I think 10% inflation incoming.

How can Johnson be blamed for that when it has been conclusively established beyond all doubt to be Hunter Biden's fault?

[frunk]

I think 10% inflation incoming.

How can Johnson be blamed for that when it has been conclusively established beyond all doubt to be Hunter Biden's fault?

They are both part of a global conspiracy to ramp up inflation and make sure their respective parties are thrown out of office.

[Sheilbh]

Incidentally on the Protocol there was an interesting piece by Newton Emerson (liberal unionist) who said he basically thinks the DUP is looking for a fig leaf to claim as victory and they will move on - I heard this being echoed by the Guardian's Northern Ireland correspondent.

The DUP line is that they will, of course, nominate a Deputy First Minister (and they have six months to do so) once their concerns with the Protocol are addressed. Their assessment was that getting back to Stormont is their priority and they are looking for something from London and Brussels to save their blushes, some fig leaf to allow them to claim a victory and move on. In their view the desire to get back to Stormont is very strong because the cost of failing to form a government in the middle of a cost of living crisis and potentially a recssion will be severe, so the fig leaf they'd accept might be quite small.

I'm not sure if that's right but I think from a Northern Irish perspective it is the key question of how much of a shock has this been and how much do the DUP want to get back into Stormont. It is something they have form for - Ian Paisley's was nicknamed the Grand Old Duke of York because of his habit of marching his troops up the hill and marching them down again. But I think their analysis probably is that they need to get back to Stormont as a priority, which means closing out the rows over the Protocol. On the other hand, I don't know if that matters because I can't think of another example of a party blowing itself up as regularly and repeatedly as the DUP have over the last few years - but their current leader is on the pragmatic wing so maybe.

[Jacob]

If Starmer does resign what does that mean? Is he done forever? Or is the kind of thing where he can still have a powerful ministry in a hypothetical future Labour gov't? Or even be elected leader again at some point in the future once everyone's "moved on"?

[Josquius]

To me it's an obvious thing to do because he would need to resign - so he might as well pre-empt that. It let's him take the high ground a little bit, but more importantly, it allows Labour to start talking about cost of living and other issues because they won't be constantly dogged with questions about Starmer. It might have an impact on Tory MPs if it happens - that will depend on the public's response but my suspicion is they will suddenly warm to Starmer if he steps down and it will cause some poll swings that will have Tory MPs who are already on edge even more concerned.

Its an easy win for Starmer IMO. He knows that he has obviously done nothing wrong and believes the chance that Durham police are quite that corrupt are low, so promise to be a man with integrity and resign if we broke the law- points for him,  points against Johnson.

From what I've read the reason the investigation has been reopened due to new evidence was my favourite MP for NW Durham forwarding a ridiculous facebook typo and something that sounds like slang but isn't as a gotcha.
https://inews.co.uk/news/beergate-police-probe-keir-starmer-labour-mp-greasy-1616915

Pathetic if thats all it takes to waste police's time. Meanwhile they take weeks to respond to the public's calls. Hope Labour can succesfully spin this in their favour on the old "One rule for them and one rule for us?"

The planning system will be reformed to give residents more involvement in local development.

[/quote]

ie lets reform it completely the opposite way of what is needed.
Thats all the major parties now really pushing hard for the NIMBY vote. Really sad stuff, I've not seen any decent writeups addressing this either.
Is there any party at all not looking for NIMBY support? Given YIMBYs are by far outnumbered I just can't see a good political approach to not at least claim to be doing this...though of course put me in charge and giving residents more involvement will basically mean shouty local idiots views can be dismissed as their petition only had 200 signatures vs. 100,000 living within the area.

[Sheilbh]

If Starmer does resign what does that mean? Is he done forever? Or is the kind of thing where he can still have a powerful ministry in a hypothetical future Labour gov't? Or even be elected leader again at some point in the future once everyone's "moved on"?

I think he'd definitely end up with a serious cabinet position - it'd be maybe challenging messaging to bring him into the cabinet/shadow cabinet but nothing impossible. Ministers have come back from scandals before, especially if they went with a "good resignation" (like in The Thick of It: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G8t6KRstWIk) - and I really suspect that if Starmer did resign he'd become the most popular politician in the country.

I can't see him as a future leader if he went - partly because there's no example of a former leader coming back in modern politics. Maybe it could be him who does it but it seems unlikely. Also he hasn't particularly connected with the public so I don't think there'd be any yearning to bring him back.

Factionally, I think Starmer would also struggle. He ran as a candidate of the left - Corbynism without Corbyn - and he has since taken very strong steps to move Labour sharply to the centre left (doing everything he can to close the anti-semitism issue and mend relations with the Jewish community, withdrawing the whip from Corbyn over that, threatening to withdraw the whip from MPs pushing the pro-Russia/Stop the War Coalition line). But at the same time the centre-left/reformist wing of Labour absolutely dont think he's one of their own. I think his role has, so far, been as a transitional figure and because of that I'm not sure what "his" constituency is in the Labour Party or if he has one.

While there might be a section of the soft left that are committed Starmerites, but I think it's probably quite small and neither the hard or the centre left would be particularly enthused by Starmer again. I'm not sure also what his message would be - especially given that his time as leader has been transitional, it's been more about moving away from Corbyn-era Labour than a clear, strong vision of Starmer Labour.

And for what it's worth people are clearly viewing this differently than Johnson - very recent polling on whether Starmer generally broke covid rules or not isn't bad for him:


While 75% of people (including about 55% of Tories) think Johnson broke the rules. The public aren't stupid and they are clearly seeing that these are different types of events/allegations even if that's the line from right-wing press looking to "whataboutery" this. Despite all this more Tory voters think Johnson broke the rules than Starmer - and they're almost certainly right.

Is there any party at all not looking for NIMBY support? Given YIMBYs are by far outnumbered I just can't see a good political approach to not at least claim to be going this...though of course put me in charge and giving residents more involvement will basically mean shouty local idiots views can be dismissed as their petition only had 200 signatures vs. 100,000 living within the area.

Literally none

[Syt]

[Tamas]

They are right about the revering an object thing. Although it is significantly better than revering a person.

[Sheilbh]

If they're mad about three cars, wait till they find out where it's kept