The prime minister must rank as one of the most stubborn and infuriating individuals you could possibly meet. Yesterday's statement to MPs in the House would have provoked a saint to smack her across the back of the head with a cricket bat. Ian Blackford, the SNP leader called her a liar (HERE) and had to retract it but the media are under no such restraint and have called her delusional (HERE).
She came to the House with absolutely zero progress since November last year when the Withdrawal Agreement was finalised. When Corbyn accused her of running down the clock, amazingly she said that it wasn't her fault:
"He talked about running down the clock, but I wanted to have this sorted before Christmas".
"The deal was negotiated before Christmas, so it is not I who is trying to run down the clock "
She didn't tell us who it was that she thought was running down the clock - perhaps it was the invisible friend she has had since childhood acting as chief lightning rod when things go wrong. Little Theresa cannot possibly ever be at fault. Ian Blackford told her, "Sometimes you should be honest with yourself, never mind being honest with the people of the United Kingdom", but honesty is something she cannot bring herself to do.
She continues to try and convince MPs that the EU are willing to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement when, as some members pointed out, everybody from Tusk and Juncker down have said, and reaffirmed dozens of times, that they are not going to do it. In a strange way you almost have to admire her stupidity and delusion, both are world class.
Any number of MPs, mainly opposition ones, asked her to remove the option of leaving without a deal from the table, to which she gave the same answer like an automaton:
"The only way to avoid no deal is agree a deal". I lost count of the number of times she said it or something very like it. Pass the cricket bat would you?
She is like the strict parent who keeps putting the same dried out meal on the table until the child eats it. I suspect some members of the ERG would sooner starve than swallow the Withdrawal Agreement. But when it finally comes to blinking she will be the first.
The 'negotiations' are a fig leaf. There are none going on. The EU will not budge on the backstop, as she well knows. And the only way the backstop might somehow be negated is by committing to closer alignment of the rules and being in the customs union.
She seems to think we will be able to secure a FTA which will allow us to run our own trade policy and enjoy frictionless trade without rules of origin checks at the border - either in Ireland or on the continent. This is delusional unless we sign up to a treaty committing us to such close alignment that we might as well be a member of the EU. This was the first thing I noted about the political declaration last December on the day it was published (HERE). As I wrote then: " 'Developing an independent trade policy (Clause 4)' and obviating 'the need for checks on rules of origin' are totally incompatible as far as I can see".
Pushed on worker's rights she claimed we enjoyed more rights than the EU minimum but it was up to the House in future if it wanted to diverge from EU regulations. Again I can't see the EU agreeing to this either. We will be required to sign up permanently in treaty form to regulatory alignment. Brussels is not going to allow us to undercut EU labour costs and gain an advantage whenever we like. It just ain't going to happen.
As usual, Ken Clarke (Hansard HERE) made a welcome contribution to reality with a question on the trade deal with Japan:
Mr Kenneth Clarke (Rushcliffe) (Con)
"My right hon. Friend will recall that, when we served together in the Cabinet, the coalition Government were very enthusiastic about the prospect of negotiating EU trade deals with important trading partners around the world, including the prospect of a trade deal with Japan. The Japan deal was concluded on 1 February, and I think it covers a bigger proportion of the global economy than any trade deal negotiated so far. Does the Prime Minister aim to seek a customs arrangement that enables us to continue to enjoy, or to begin to get, the benefits of this important deal after 29 March, or is she insisting that we have to leave it and have our own trade policy, and begin our own negotiations with a country that has a much bigger economy than our own and is likely to demand concessions from the United Kingdom that it was not able to demand from the European Union?"
The Prime Minister
"My right hon. and learned Friend is absolutely right that the economic partnership agreement with Japan came into force on 1 February. Of course, prior to that, we had been trading with Japan on World Trade Organisation arrangements. It has been the policy of the Government, in relation to the trade deals that have been agreed between the European Union and countries around the world, that we see continuity in those agreements at the point at which we leave the European Union—we have also been working to see continuity were we to leave with no deal—but we also want to ensure that we can enhance our trade arrangements with countries around the world, and so build our own trade agreements with those countries. The best and most sensible approach is to maintain trading relations as they are as we leave the European Union, and then build and enhance those trading relations with our own independent trade agreements".
She believes we are going to 'maintain' the trade deal with Japan and even 'enhance' our trading relations with our own separate agreements. We are one seventh of the size of the EU.
The delusions continue.
The delusions continue.
