I have been trying to avoid obsessing over Brexit for the past few months. For all the shouting among UK politicians and all the breathless reporting in the press, nothing has really changed since December. A withdrawal agreement has been negotiated and Parliament still needs to decide whether to ratify it, or crash out of the EU with no deal or revoke Article 50 and bring this whole sorry mess to an end.

With that in mind, Chris Grey makes a point worth repeating.

An additional issue to consider is whether the EU would countenance an extension anyway

Much of the recent Parliamentary maneuverings have been around forcing Boris Johnson to request an extension to Britain’s EU membership before the exit date of October 31st. What no-one seems to be taking into account is that there is no guarantee that the EU will agree to such a request. Furthermore, given that the UK is still running around in circles, there is a good chance that leaders of the other EU countries will say no.

Back in March, when Theresa May asked for an extension, Macron was very vocal about not wanting the UK to still be sucking up the EU’s time and attention after the EU parliament elections in May. While he was the most vocal of the EU leaders, he wasn’t completely isolated and several other countries were leaning towards the view that, if the UK is going to crash out anyway, it would be better to cut the process short and get it over with.

After that extension was granted, Parliament immediately went on holiday and then the Conservative party decided that the best use of their time would be to organise yet another leadership election. And now the UK is stuck with a prime minister whose dishonesty is so bare-faced that no-one — not even his own brother — is willing to trust him.

Parliament probably is going to force Johnson to ask for an extension and, when he does so, the leaders of the other EU countries will ask what would be the point of such an extension. I am not convinced that the UK has a good answer to this.

—

On a related note, if anyone reading this happens to be a student, don’t forget to register to vote.

When a country does something as idiotic as this, and it has popular support, there is something deeply wrong with that country.

— Simon Wren-Lewis on Brexit

Andrew Rawnsley is one of the more insightful political commenters out there but this doesn’t stop him from making the same mistake as a lot of the UK media in that he tends to look at Brexit for an entirely British point of view. Thus, we have this article suggesting that Boris Johnson will call an early election in order to crash the UK out of the EU.

The problem with this line of reasoning is that Johnson doesn’t actually have to do anything if he wants a no-deal Brexit.

It’s all well and good saying that Parliament won’t allow a no-deal Brexit but the only ways of avoiding this, ultimately, are to ratify the existing withdrawal agreement or to revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.

Parliament can try to force Johnson to request another extension, but there is no guarantee that the EU will agree to grant one. Given the way in which the UK has wasted the time since April and the low esteem in which Johnson is held, it looks increasingly likely, to me, that the EU heads of government will decide that it’s better to get Brexit over with than to drag it on any longer.

So, if Parliament remains unable to decide whether to ratify the withdrawal agreement or revoke Article 50, then Britain crashes out of the EU on the 31st October, at which point Johnson will claim to have “delivered Brexit”, thus rendering Farage’s Brexit Party irrelevant.

So Johnson doesn’t need to call a general election in order to achieve a no-deal Brexit. On the other hand, if he calls an election in November, after the UK has crashed out of the EU but before the consequences start to bite, then the collapse of the Brexit party would be probably enough for him to hoover up the Leave vote and win a majority.

Johnson is blatantly gearing up for an election, but I don’t think it will happen until after Britain’s disorderly exit from the EU. The only way to stop him is for Parliament to call a no-confidence vote and bring down the government before the end of October.

Parliament returns on 3rd September. MPs will need to get their act together — and quickly — if they want to call a halt to this madness before it’s too late.

[W]e have a Prime Minister chosen by a tiny and highly unrepresentative fragment of the electorate to enact an extreme policy that has no democratic mandate whatsoever.

— Chris Grey

At the time of writing this post, the petition to Revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU has reached 5.84 million signatures and the Government has responded. Unsurprisingly, the Government response is the usual stream of nonsense and platitudes:

This Government will not revoke Article 50. We will honour the result of the 2016 referendum and work with Parliament to deliver a deal that ensures we leave the European Union.

In the opening sentence the Government reveals itself to be either delusional or dishonest by claiming that they will work with Parliament. This government has done everything it can to avoid working with Parliament, culminating with last week’s rant from Theresa May — the world’s worst populist — in which she tried to portray herself a tribune of the people in opposition to Parliament.

If she wasn’t so incompetent, she’d be dangerous.

It remains the Government’s firm policy not to revoke Article 50. We will honour the outcome of the 2016 referendum and work to deliver an exit which benefits everyone, whether they voted to Leave or to Remain.

An exit that benefits everyone? I would be interested to know what such an exit would look like because, so far, every form of Brexit that has been proposed leaves the UK worse off than before. And, with the approach the government has taken so far, Brexit is already making people worse off.

People who were already rich enough to have money to shift around offshore accounts (hello, Jacob Rees-Mogg) may well benefit from Brexit. For everyone who needs to earn an income, life is going to get a lot harder.

Revoking Article 50, and thereby remaining in the European Union, would undermine both our democracy and the trust that millions of voters have placed in Government.

What trust? Only 7% of voters think the government has handled Brexit well. Nearly two thirds of voters think the government’s deal is a bad one. Whatever trust that might have been placed in this government has been well and truly squandered by their incompetence, evasiveness and outright dishonesty.

As for undermining democracy, I’m tempted to suggest that the Honorable Members of Her Majesty’s Government may need to apply for remedial lessons in Understanding the Constitution.

Britain is a Parliamentary democracy and one in which referenda are not a normal part. Indeed, Clement Atlee described referendums as “alien to all our traditions” and Margaret Thatcher described them as “a device of dictators and demagogues”. Britain has no tradition of using referendums and no process for dealing with the results.

Parliamentary sovereignty means that power, ultimately, rests with Parliament. When a government’s attempts at implementing a policy are so abysmal that companies are having to stockpile food and medicine, it is not only reasonable for Parliament to call a halt to the disaster, but Parliament’s job.

The Government acknowledges the considerable number of people who have signed this petition. However, close to three quarters of the electorate took part in the 2016 referendum, trusting that the result would be respected.

52% of nearly three quarters of the electorate. That’s 39%.

In countries where referenda are used, this would not be a sufficient majority to implement a change such as this. Hell, in the UK, a majority like this isn’t even sufficient for a union to call a strike. So why the insistence that it’s enough to crash the economy?

This Government wrote to every household prior to the referendum, promising that the outcome of the referendum would be implemented. 17.4 million people then voted to leave the European Union, providing the biggest democratic mandate for any course of action ever directed at UK Government.

To paraphrase something said to me in the run-up to the referendum: “I’m thinking of voting leave just to see the back of that smug bastard [David Cameron].”

People voted leave for a whole range of reasons, not all of which had much — or anything — to do with Britain’s membership of the EU. Tellingly, the Government has made no attempt to understand or address the reasons that people voted the way they did. Instead, they have decided that the sizable minority that voted remain don’t matter and that all leave voters fully agree with the most extreme parts of the Conservative party. And that really is bad for democracy.

British people cast their votes once again in the 2017 General Election where over 80% of those who voted, voted for parties, including the Opposition, who committed in their manifestos to upholding the result of the referendum.

If you have a choice between two parties, both of which are promising to implement the same policy, then it’s not much of a choice. Labour’s failure to offer an alternative cannot be taken as proof of support for the only option on offer.

It’s also worth noting that manifesto commitments are not set in stone. They can’t be. No-one can know what other events will happen over the course of a Parliament or what new information may or may not emerge.

I think that most people understand that a manifesto can only ever be aspirational at best and that it is insane to stick to a commitment when all of the available evidence points to it being a disaster that will only get worse.

This Government stands by this commitment.

See above.

Revoking Article 50 would break the promises made by Government to the British people, disrespect the clear instruction from a democratic vote, and in turn, reduce confidence in our democracy. As the Prime Minister has said, failing to deliver Brexit would cause “potentially irreparable damage to public trust”, and it is imperative that people can trust their Government to respect their votes and deliver the best outcome for them.

The person doing most to damage public trust is Theresa May with her inept populism and the best outcome for people is for Brexit to be cancelled.

Parliament is due to debate this petition on 1st April. Now would be a good time to let your MP know what you think.

The media yesterday were full of Theresa May’s “crunch vote” on her Brexit deal — the same deal that was rejected earlier this year. And to no-one’s great surprise, it was rejected again, this time by 149 votes.

The press today is full of commentary as to what this all means, and so much of this is just noise.

Parliament will vote today on whether they want to exit the EU without a deal, and the expectation is that a no deal Brexit will be rejected. This amounts to little more than empty posturing and won’t change the fact that the UK is due to leave the EU on March 29th and, if no deal is agreed, the UK will crash out of the EU with no deal.

Tomorrow, assuming Parliament votes against no deal, they will all get together again to decide to request an extension to the Article 50 negotiating period. The rest of EU are already asking what would be the point of such an extension given that the UK is still unable to decide what it wants to achieve. And if there is no point to delaying Brexit, no delay will be forthcoming.

Since the Withdrawal Agreement was signed off, there have been three options on the table: Ratify the Withdrawal Agreement, crash out with no deal, or revoke Article 50 and cancel Brexit. This was the case in January, it was the case yesterday and it will still be the case tomorrow.

The ongoing mess that is Brexit has already damaged the UK. Firms are leaving the country, jobs are going to be lost and the fantasy trade deals promised by the Government aren’t going to come close to replacing any of this. If Brexit goes ahead, with a deal or without, Britain will become smaller, poorer and forced to accept any conditions imposed by any potential trading partner.

And it still won’t be over, because leaving the EU isn’t the end of this mess, it’s the start of the next one in which the UK continues to fail at everything (trade, travel, security, etc.) that could, until now, be taken for granted.

The only way to stop the mess, limit the damage and bring this whole screaming clusterfuck to an end is to revoke Article 50 and remain in the EU.