Brexit and the waning days of the United Kingdom

[crazy canuck]

Sunak announcing the "Winter Economic Plan". It's very, very weird seeing a Tweet like this from a Tory Chancellor meeting with the head of the Confederation of British Industry (fine) and the Trades Union Congress ( ) ahead of their announcements:

Rishi Sunak
@RishiSunak
Productive meeting and pleased to have support for our Winter Economy Plan from @cbicarolyn of @CBItweets and @FrancesOGrady of @The_TUC ahead of my statement to the House of Commons shortly.

I have no doubt the TUC will clarify their "support" later today. But it's still weird - I understand this is normal in other Northern European countries like Benelux, Nordics, Germany etc.

Odd to be signaling the need for austerity by cutting back on his pant length.  One would think stimulus would be more appropriate.

[Zanza]

https://www.ft.com/content/6ef81388-efde-4966-a76f-1eeea18f6952?shareType=nongift

In parliament Tory MPs claimed Mr Johnson's scientific advisers were pushing him into taking draconian measures and were engaged in a "Project Fear", which was harming the economy.

But behind the scenes Mr Johnson's team attempted to reassure Tory rebels that the House of Commons would in future have more say over new Covid-19 restrictions.

The fact that the rebellion is led by Sir Graham Brady, chair of the backbench Tory 1922 committee, is a sign of the depth of concern among MPs at the scope of the new restrictions.

Talks between the rebels and chief whip Mark Spencer, leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg and Mr Hancock took place on Monday afternoon to try to hammer out a compromise.

"I'm happy to report it was a cordial and constructive meeting," Steve Baker, a former minister and leader of the rebel group, said. "I hope and expect we will reach a satisfactory agreement."

I have a déjà vu.

[Tamas]

https://www.ft.com/content/6ef81388-efde-4966-a76f-1eeea18f6952?shareType=nongift

In parliament Tory MPs claimed Mr Johnson's scientific advisers were pushing him into taking draconian measures and were engaged in a "Project Fear", which was harming the economy.

But behind the scenes Mr Johnson's team attempted to reassure Tory rebels that the House of Commons would in future have more say over new Covid-19 restrictions.

The fact that the rebellion is led by Sir Graham Brady, chair of the backbench Tory 1922 committee, is a sign of the depth of concern among MPs at the scope of the new restrictions.

Talks between the rebels and chief whip Mark Spencer, leader of the House of Commons Jacob Rees-Mogg and Mr Hancock took place on Monday afternoon to try to hammer out a compromise.

"I'm happy to report it was a cordial and constructive meeting," Steve Baker, a former minister and leader of the rebel group, said. "I hope and expect we will reach a satisfactory agreement."

I have a déjà vu.

Interesting so they are rebelling to torpedo restrictions? Awesome.

[Sheilbh]

So I think it's cross-party and more about Parliament having more control over restrictions - at the minute they're just regulations issued by government/ministers. Now I imagine the Tory rebels want an end to a lot of these restrictions (and have apparently been very disappointed in Johnson and Cummings especially ) but I kind of agree that ultimately the Commons should be reviewing and approving decisions that are this wide-ranging and punitive. I can accept an emergency situation in March/April, but we're looking at long-term regulations now and that shouldn't just be in the hands of the government.

There's a book on the last few years of British politics through who is "project fear". It was first used by unionists to complacently describe their own approach during the Indy Ref, it was then used mockingly and re-appropriated by the SNP as people were told to ignore "project fear" and every possible risk in independence was diminished as "project fear". At that point the Cameroons maybe realised it wasn't a great internal slogan for what they were campaigning for, but it got used by Brexiteers. It's also been used by Labour over the government preparing contingency plans (in the hung Parliament days, when "project fear" was being used to intimidate opposition MPs to back the deal) and to comments about Corbyn and his plans, and now by the anti-lockdown types

[Sheilbh]

Another interesting sign on UK foreign policy post-Brexit. Joint statement with Canada on Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as joint statement and sanctions on Lukashenko and other figures linked to the regime

[Tamas]

Another interesting sign on UK foreign policy post-Brexit. Joint statement with Canada on Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as joint statement and sanctions on Lukashenko and other figures linked to the regime

I know we are just repeating old conversations, but was the EU really standing in the way of joint actions with Canada?

[Josquius]

I do wonder how much this is just common sense alignment and how much they really are trying to show off to the "Bring back teh empire" crowd.

[Admiral Yi]

I know we are just repeating old conversations, but was the EU really standing in the way of joint actions with Canada?

Shelf mentioned the case of Cyprus vetoing EU sanctions against Lukashenko.

[Sheilbh]

I know we are just repeating old conversations, but was the EU really standing in the way of joint actions with Canada?

Very old - because it doesn't really matter any more because we've had the vote. This isn't an argument in favour of Brexit, it's more a sign that we'll take advantage of the ability to be a bit more responsive/nimble (on Hong Kong, Belarus and Armenia in the last year) and are deepening ties with like-minded countries which is positive.

In terms of statements, no; in terms of sanctions, yes. The UK was part of the EU sanctions regime, so recent sanctions on Lukashenko and other regime figures wouldn't happen because Cyprus is vetoing them. I think sacntions can be imposed by member states but it's normally quite limited (I suppose, because it indirectly relates to trade?).

Also the UK is now doing Magnitsky sanctions (like the US and Canada). The EU intends to move to that model, it's been approved by the European Parliament and is a priority for the Commission but at present that sort of model that targets individuals within a regime doesn't really exist at a European level in the same way.

[Barrister]

Another interesting sign on UK foreign policy post-Brexit. Joint statement with Canada on Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as joint statement and sanctions on Lukashenko and other figures linked to the regime

Has there been much interest in the UK for the so-called CANZUK proposal for increased co-operation, and maybe free trade and movement, between UK, Canada Australia and New Zealand?

[Sheilbh]

I do wonder how much this is just common sense alignment and how much they really are trying to show off to the "Bring back teh empire" crowd.

Or maybe the "bring back teh empire" crowd were right that actually we are aligned in a sort-of common sense way with some countries like Canada, Australia (I'd add the Nordics who have signed up for some of the measures/statements on Hong Kong) and maybe we need to get over the post-imperial cringe and just work with them.

I mean I do think there are fundamental similarities - medium sized economies/countries who share a number of values/principles and vulnerabilities. To that I'd add that I hope we start working more closely with Japan and Korea - Cameron and Osborne spent a lot of time building up relations with Japan, Korea and Philippines and then pissed it away by deciding to court China instead (still I'm sure they can get lots of attractive consultancy roles now they've retired)

[Sheilbh]

Another interesting sign on UK foreign policy post-Brexit. Joint statement with Canada on Nagorno-Karabakh, as well as joint statement and sanctions on Lukashenko and other figures linked to the regime

Has there been much interest in the UK for the so-called CANZUK proposal for increased co-operation, and maybe free trade and movement, between UK, Canada Australia and New Zealand?

Yeah. As Tyr says there's a bit which is just post-imperial fetishism, but I also think there's a bit of post-imperial cringe and wanting to avoid natural allies because of empire. There seems to be a fair amount of interest in policy circles and even people in foreign policy think tanks who are on the left are starting to look at it (I think Hong Kong was a big factor). It feels that, given the response on a few issues this year, that our first calls when dealing with issues to do with China or Russia should be Ottawa, Canberra and Wellington.

I also think in terms of free trade and movement there's been some positive signs and the UK also wants to join the Pacific trade agreement - can't remember what it's called. I think there's far more chance of free trade (and free movement of a sort) agreements with Australia, Canada and New Zealand than a trade deal with the US despite how much that's been the great hope of Brexiters.

Edit: In fact there's apparently been polling on free movement and it's supported in all countries of the UK by between 65-70%. I imagine it's less popular in Australia faced with the very real risk of hordes of Brits emigrating

[Zanza]

When talking about joining the Trans Pacific Partnership, how is the position of the Brexiteers and Cummings regarding sovereignty?

After all, the TPP establishes an arbitration mechanism for investor state disputes that follows international law and establishes level playing field rules for state aid... 

You know, the things modern deep trade agreements do...

Also TPP has been ratified by two of the eleven signatories so far.

[Barrister]

I also think in terms of free trade and movement there's been some positive signs and the UK also wants to join the Pacific trade agreement - can't remember what it's called. I think there's far more chance of free trade (and free movement of a sort) agreements with Australia, Canada and New Zealand than a trade deal with the US despite how much that's been the great hope of Brexiters.

Edit: In fact there's apparently been polling on free movement and it's supported in all countries of the UK by between 65-70%. I imagine it's less popular in Australia faced with the very real risk of hordes of Brits emigrating

I do have some fondness for the idea, but it's hard to get around the issue of race.  Why is it this proposed alliance is those 4 specific countries and not, I dunno India or Nigeria?

[Josquius]

Australia have said no to free movement. And you can understand why.
As to joining TPP... It's not just silly optically but in terms of numbers too, the TPP countries account for a tiny fraction of our trade. And getting more involved in trading with them sort of flies against the push to do more locally.