Britain's Brexit Withdrawal Agreement: Moving Forward Pt.2

A direct continuation of Part One; https://watchitdie.blogspot.com/2019/01/britains-brexit-withdrawal-agreement_57.html

In that post I looked at how the Withdrawal Agreement passes the tests of honouring the 2016 referendum to leave the EU.

I also looked at how the objections to the Withdrawal Agreement raised by British Parliamentarians are almost entirely false.

As such it is clear that Britain must adopt the Withdrawal Agreement. Without further delay.

The Withdrawal Agreement represents a multi-dimensional treaty between 28 nations. As such I don't think it's really possible to describe it as; "Simple."

However in terms of negotiating multi-dimensional treaties between nations the Withdrawal Agreement and the process it has been arrived at has been smooth, organised and easy.

One similar negotiation process I've been heavily involved in is the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Specifically efforts to draw up a replacement to the Kyoto Protocol. Known as the Durban Platform.

This process was designed to take four years. Spread out across quarterly and, in the later stages monthly meetings.

The final set of meetings was supposed to be the 21st Conference of Parties (COP21). This was scheduled to end on December 11th 2015 (11/12/15).

Like pretty much every UNFCCC meeting it spectacularly failed to end on schedule. Instead it had to be extended, at the last minute into an extra day.

On that extra, final day several versions of the 27 page agreement were circulated over the course of around five hours. Giving negotiators just minutes to read each new version, assess it and negotiate changes.

Amid the stress and chaos the US negotiating team screwed up.

At the last minute they re-wrote the fourth paragraph of Article 4 of what became the Paris Agreement. This change allows China and India - the 2nd and 3rd largest emitters of greenhouse gases (ghg's) - to continue growing their emissions by as much as they like.

Failing in any way to combat Climate Change the Paris Agreement was adopted simply because, at that point everyone just wanted to go home and go to sleep.

Amid both UNFCCC and EU circles there is a famous story of how then Prime Minister Tony Blair signed Britain up to the EU's emissions trading scheme.

Going into the 2007 EU Summit Britain only wanted to sign up the non-commercial sectors of its economy to the scheme. Private homes rather than businesses.

The final session of that EU Summit went on for more than 36 hours straight. Without breaks for sleep or even meals.

By the end of it former Prime Minister Blair had signed up all sectors of the UK economy, including business, to the EU emissions trading scheme.

The story has it that sleep deprived and highly stressed former Prime Minister Blair simply no longer had any idea what he was signing Britain up to.

That story, of course has been put about by former Prime Minister Blair's political rivals.

However people familiar with this type of negotiation have absolutely no trouble believing it.

In contrast the negotiations over the Withdrawal Agreement have reached a comprehensive and mutually beneficial consensus. Some four months before the final deadline of March 29th (29/3/19).

A feat that is virtually unheard of in negotiations of this type.

The only thing that is making the Brexit process difficult is Britain's seemingly idiotic Parliamentarians.

The good news is that the moment the Withdrawal Agreement is adopted things immediately get a whole lot easier.

For a host of reasons;

A Covenant Held: Throughout the referendum campaign current British Prime Minister Theresa May kept an extremely low profile. Earning her the nickname; "The Submarine."

Eventually Theresa May surfaced. Quietly coming out on the side of Remain.

When Theresa May became the Prime Minister tasked with guiding Britain through the Brexit process this created a lot of suspicion amongst Brexiteers, those who voted to Leave.

They were concerned that Prime Minister May would behave like all the other Remoaner politicians. Abuse her position to block Brexit and impose her views on the electorate.

A system of government that is commonly known as; "Tyranny."

As it turns out Prime Minister May has done absolutely nothing of the sort. She has put her own, personal views to one side. Instead taking on the views and concerns of the British people, both Leave and Remain. Even the completely insane ones.

Prime Minister May has then taken the views of the British electorate and presented them to the EU during the Withdrawal Agreement negotiations. Winning significant concessions from the EU in the process.

This type selflessness is exactly the quality that voters in a democracy should look for in their politicians, leaders and public servants.

It's the other 642 self-serving crooks in Parliament Britain wants to be getting rid of.

Regardless of whether the Withdrawal Agreement is adopted or not Britain will leave the EU on March 29th (29/3/19).  This will remove any question of Prime Minister May betraying the Brexiteers in an effort to keep Britain within the EU.

The Brexiteers, of course can continue to be suspicious of how close a relationship with the EU Prime Minister May is trying to build.

However they will no longer be able to accuse her of trying to block Brexit.

The Remoaners: These are the people who voted to Remain in the EU.

Previously I've compared the Four Pillars of EU membership to the Five Pillars of Islam. For many Remoaners membership of the EU is something which has taken on almost religious levels of significance and devotion.

For many Remoaners continued membership of the EU is a deep existential issue. One that defines their very existence. It is was determines that they are Good People. Superior in every way to the Bad People who voted to Leave.

These Remoaners have, in no way accepted the result of the referendum.

From the moment the referendum result was announced they have engaged in a campaign to keep Britain within the EU. Their main strategy has been to obstruct, obfuscate and confuse the Brexit process at every step.

The Remoaners objective is to make everything so extremely difficult that people will simply give up and Britain will remain in the EU.

This type of Remoaner is massively over represented within the British Parliament.

That is despite the entire House of Commons being elected in 2017 on a clear mandate to honour the 2016 referendum and ensure Britain leaves the EU.

With the exception of the SNP's 35 MP's, The Liberal Democrats 12 MP's, Plaid Cymru's 4 MP's and the Green Party's 1 MP.

The reason why Remoaners are massively over represented in Parliament is actually quite simple.

Leaving the EU will restore power to the British Parliament. Bizarre as it sounds the biggest losers from power being restored to the British Parliament are actually British Parliamentarians.

Currently laws in Britain are passed by the EU. They then automatically become British laws through the 1972 European Communities Act.

British Parliamentarians only involvement in this process to receive a text message or email telling them that the law has changed.

At this point British Parliamentarians look up from their expense claims just long enough to boast to voters about what they've achieved.

And why their 'achievement' means they should be allowed to keep their GB£77,000 a year 'job.'

For evidence of this you only need to look at the Withdrawal Agreement. This contain lengthy lists of British laws that must remain in place after Britain has left the EU.

However those laws are not referenced using the British Act of Parliament which created them. No British Act of Parliament created them.

Instead the laws are referenced under the prefix; "ED." Meaning; "European Directive."

This is the main reason why Britain can't simply leave the EU with No Deal.

No British Parliamentarian has actually done a day's work in about 40 years. 

Prior to the Christmas recess the Remoaners tactics have focused on obfuscation and spreading confusion.

For example claiming the government has no Plan B. When, in fact the Withdrawal Agreement not only contains a Plan B it also contains a Plan C.

Likewise claiming the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland contains no legally binding guarantees.

When, in fact the protocol not only contains multiple legally binding guarantees it also contains a dispute resolution mechanism to enforce those legally binding guarantees.

Another particularly popular Remoaner tactic has been to confuse matters by demanding the government lays out Britain's future relationship with the EU.

Throwing around almost nonsense terms such as; "Iceland Plus," Canada Max," Norway Plus Plus or; "Liechtensteiner Coffee Table!"

The purpose of the Withdrawal Agreement is not to establish Britain's future relationship with the EU.

Instead its purpose is to establish, through the Transition Period a properly structured and time limited forum to establish Britain's future relationship with the EU.

If Britain's Parliamentarians wish to discuss Britain's future relationship with the EU then they must adopt the Withdrawal Agreement. So the Transition Period negotiations can begin without delay.

It must be said that since the Christmas recess the Remoaners seem to have become increasingly aware that they're tactics are not working. The public can easily see through what are obvious lies.

So instead the Remoaners have shifted tactics to open aggression and intimidation.

For example on Tuesday, January 8th (8/1/19) Remoaners amended a Finance Bill. The amendment prevents the government from spending money in the event of a No Deal Brexit without first winning a time consuming vote in Parliament.

This amendment will not prevent Britain leaving the EU on March 29th (29/3/19). Nor will it prevent the severe economic crisis of a No Deal Brexit.

All it will do is prevent the government from deploying resources to alleviate the immediate effects of that economic crisis.

The Remoaners hope is that the threat of this is so horrifying that it will scare the government into submission. Overturning the 2017 European Union Act, keeping Britain within the EU.

On Wednesday, January 9th (9/1/19) Remoaners amended the Withdrawal Bill itself. To force the government to return to Parliament within three days of a potential defeat to inform Parliamentarians of the next steps.

Again this amendment will not prevent Britain leaving the EU on March 29th (29/3/19). Nor will it prevent the severe economic crisis of a No Deal Brexit.

All the amendment means is that Parliament will have to wait three days rather than three weeks to be told that the Withdrawal Agreement bill will be reintroduced. At a time of the government's choosing.

After all Remoaners have made it abundantly clear that it is perfectly acceptable to force people to keep voting on something until they come up with the correct answer.

The Remoaners calculation is that being forced to make this announcement in three days rather than three weeks will trigger significant anger against the government. Triggering a Parliamentary motion of no confidence in the government.

The Remoaners hope is that the threat of this is so horrifying that it will scare the government into submission. Overturning the 2017 European Union Act, keeping Britain within the EU.

The real scandal of Wednesday's (9/1/19) amendment is that Parliamentary rules are quite clear.

Only a minister of the government may introduce amendments to a government bill. Dominic Grieve who tabled this amendment is not a government minister.

The supposedly impartial  Speaker of the Commons, Remoaner John Bercow was informed by his Chief Clerk and legal adviser of this rule. And that Grieve was not able to table this amendment.

However John Bercow completely and wilfully ignored the rules of Parliamentary democracy and allowed the amendment to go ahead any way.

These tyrannical tactics of threats, intimidation and, frankly law breaking have absolutely no place in a supposedly civilised democracy.

British Parliamentarians are absolutely terrified of power being restored to the British Parliament. It means they will actually have to do a day's work. Rather than claiming credit for laws passed by the EU.

This prospect is a particular problem for parties which appeal to voters of the grounds they are; "Progressive." Fighting to protect workers rights, social justice and the environment etc.

For the past 40 years legislation in those areas has been exclusively the work of the EU. British political parties involvement has been limited to trying to steal the credit.

Of these self-styled "progressive" parties there is one that stands to lose far more than most from Brexit.

The Scottish National Party (SNP): It's long been the claim of all opposition parties that Prime Minister May is an incompetent Prime Minister and a terrible negotiator.

In that case it is an incompetent Prime Minister and a terrible negotiator who has absolutely run rings around the SNP.

In February 2017 Britain passed the European Union Act into law. This established that Britain will be leaving the EU.

However there remained the question of when exactly Britain would put the European Union Act into effect by formally notifying the EU. What is known as; "Article 50."

In early March 2017 Prime Minister May put around a rumour that this would happen on March 13th (13/3/17).

That rumour prompted SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon to try and steal Prime Minister May's thunder. Sturgeon called her own address to the nation for March 13th (13/3/17).

Sturgeon used her address to the nation to declare that post-Brexit Scotland would hold another referendum on independence from Britain. In order for an independent Scotland to join the EU.

With this declaration Nicola Sturgeon did not steal anyone's thunder.

There was no announcement on Article 50 being activated. There was never any plan for an announcement on that day. It was simply a rumour put around to trick the SNP.

Having being tricked into the announcement the SNP were then lumbered with this promise to hold a Scottish Independence referendum. As they headed into the June 2017 General Election.

That June 2017 General Election is often considered Prime Minister May's greatest mistake. Leading to her Conservative Party losing seats and even their Parliamentary majority.

In Scotland however the 2017 General Election was a massive success for the Conservative Party. And an absolute bloodbath for the SNP.

Due, almost exclusively to their Remain stance and promise of an independence referendum the SNP lost 21 of their 56 seats. With 12 of those seats being lost to the Conservatives.

Any one of those 12 seats would represent the first Conservative gain in Scotland since 1997.

Despite this crushing defeat at the 2017 General Election the SNP are still lumbered with this promise to respond to Brexit by holding a Scottish Independence referendum.

The annual budget of Scotland is around GB£33bn.

At the moment of Brexit Scotland will lose GB£76m of that money. The money which is paid to Scotland by the EU.

The moment Scotland leaves the UK, as the SNP are pushing for, it will lose the GB£29bn block grant it receives from, predominately England.

Scotland will also have to take on extra costs which are currently met by the UK. On things like defence and diplomacy. Membership fees for the UN and its subsidiary bodies etc.

This means that overnight Scotland will be paying out at least 3,000% more money than it raises in revenue.

Locked out of the international financial system an Independent Scotland will then have to go through the long process of applying to be a new member of the EU.

It is far from guaranteed that such an application will be successful.

As part of their effort to block Brexit the SNP brought a case before the Court of European Justice.

It asked the Court to decide whether, once activated Article 50 could be unilaterally withdrawn. Or whether such a more would require the consent of the other members of the EU.

On December 10th (10/12/18) the Court of European Justice ruled that Article 50 can be unilaterally withdrawn.

In considering this case the Court had to balance two competing sets of interests;

The right of a nation to change it's mind and withdraw Article 50.

Against the right of the other members of the EU to be protected from a nation invoking then revoking Article 50. Simply as a negotiating tactic on another issue.

Within the EU there are currently a number of disputes which could see Article 50 invoked as a negotiating tactic.

There is of course the threat to suspend Hungary's voting rights. The conventional wisdom is that Poland will veto such a move. For the simple reason that Poland needs Hungary to veto a similar move to suspend Poland's voting rights.

The dispute I'm most interested in though is over Italy's budget.

EU rules prevent member states from having a budget with a deficit larger than 2%. In October 2018 the Italian government passed a budget with a deficit of 2.6%. This was rejected by the EU leading to an ongoing stand-off between Italy and the EU.

The Italian government has suggested, in the past, that it might invoke Article 50 as part of the budget dispute with the EU.

I'm particularly interested in Italy's dispute here because it allows me to say that the Court ruling will see Article 50 go up and down more often than Berlusconi's trousers.

It says a lot that the EU would rather deal with all that. Than have to deal with the SNP.

If an independent Scotland does, by some miracle, win the support of 26 EU members the conventional wisdom is that Spain will automatically veto its EU membership bid. To prevent similar moves by Spain's Catalonia region.

Even if it is accepted as an EU member the first thing Scotland will have to do is impose a long and draconian policy of austerity. In order to bring its spending deficit down from 3,000%.

So the SNP find themselves in the impossible position of having to stop Brexit. Or admit to voters that their entire reason for existing is a lie.

Whether the Withdrawal Agreement is passed or not Britain will leave the EU on March 29th (29/3/19).

This will be the end of the road for the Remoaners.

They will no longer be able to campaign to keep Britain in the EU. They will only be able to campaign for Britain to join the EU as a new member. Something which is far from guaranteed.

Given the way the British Parliament has behaved in the debate over the Withdrawal Agreement the EU may well decide that British politics is not up to the standard required of EU members.


(Originally posted at 16:25 on 13/1/19 (UK date)).


18:35 on 15/1/19 (UK date).