What was most noticeable about yesterday's casual announcement of parliament being prorogued for five weeks was the lack of any high or even low profile ministers who were prepared to appear on television afterwards defending it. Not even Kwasi Kwarteng. Either they think it's indefensible or they can't see the problem. I note this morning Gove has now spoken in support of it and so has Jacob Rees-Mogg. But what about Rudd or Javid?
A Bloomberg website called it a brutal game of truth or dare. It looks like Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Tory leader, will resign this morning. Will she be just the first?
Our daily briefing from SMIU (Social Media Intelligence Unit) is that the government is pleased with the response so far - the more we protest the more the government will be able to portray us as the anti-democratic extremists:
"The government is fully prepared to run a general election campaign which sets itself against all opposition forces on a democratic "will of the people" ticket versus the "antidemocratic forces" label. This is still not the primary option but the government believes it can win a supermajority in this scenario and will work with others to achieve this outcome if it becomes necessary. The primary option is to get Brexit across the line on 31st October and the government believes it can achieve this without any opposition measures succeeding."
A protest was hastily organised in Parliament Square that attracted 80,000 and the on-line petition asking for parliament not to be prorogued hit a million in a few hours. We'll see what the MPs can do next week.
For what it's worth I don't think it changes much. Johnson won't succeed in winning concessions from Brussels by threats and he won't take us out without a deal either. In my opinion that is.
The prorogation announcement rather overshadowed a speech given by Brexit Secretary Stephen Barclay to businessmen in Paris at something called the MEDEF Université d'été conference. This has not been widely reported and according to the programme (HERE) he wasn't even scheduled to appear although Simon Coveney and Michel Barnier were. It seems a last minute thing.
Reading his speech is like time traveling back to 2017 when David Davis was going around Europe making similar speeches and the government was publishing position papers explaining how close we were and emphasising our shared values, suggesting everything should remain as it is now.
A few extracts:
Barclay conveniently ignores the fact that the UK has also committed to respecting the integrity of the single market but let's not mention that. And what about this for chutzpah:
"Likewise the UK is often asked for more detail on its proposals. Yet if the test is one of 100% certainty, all-weather, all-of-life insurance, then creative and flexible solutions will always be quickly shot down. Progress requires creativity and flexibility on both sides – including in the application of single market rules. We recognise the concern about the risk of a backdoor to the single market, but we need to deal with it in a different way, one which reflects the value of democracy that we share."
Barnier, if he was there, must have had his head in his hands at this point. It was an admission that we don't have any realistic, workable, operable alternative arrangements and as a soon-to-be ex-member we want the EU to change the single market rules - or at least 'the application' of them. He wants to "look at this issue afresh as partners" because if not...
".. and we move to a no deal exit, people will question in the future why there was such a lack of flexibility, and indeed why, in the pursuit of a 100 per cent guarantee of no risk on the Irish border at the end of 2020, we made real this risk in November."
In other words it will be the fault of the EU for being inflexible not the UK for being inflexible.
He talks about the fishing, car and other industries:
"Take fishing for example, in the event of a no deal exit access to UK waters falls entirely within the UK’s control. That, of course, has a potential impact on the French fishing industry. Of the 250,000 tonnes of fish processed in Boulogne, the majority comes from UK waters and of the fish landed by French vessels, 40 per cent of it comes from UK waters.
"At the same time, about 80,000 tonnes of our own salmon, scallops and other seafood products end up on the French table each year - you are a significant export market for us.
"The exceptional fluidity of the cross-Channel trade routes supports the fishing industry, just as it does the car industry with its “just in time” supply chains. That fluidity sees more than 1,100 trucks cross seamlessly into the UK from the Continent each day laden with car parts. There are, of course, other changes that will arise from a no deal.
"For example, Geographical Indicators. It’s worth recognising that there are over 3,000 products registered with GIs in the EU but only 88 are from the UK. Or in agriculture where, according to France’s biggest farming union, French wine and spirits producers would be materially impacted. They’re set to have a €1.3bn annual surplus in trade with the UK.
"Or France’s dairy industry which - according to the French Chambers of Agriculture - has an annual surplus in exports to the UK of €700-800m.
"Monsieur President these are just some of the areas that it is our job – as politicians and business leaders – not just to protect but allow to flourish".
Barclay wants trade to 'flourish' by erecting barriers and adding friction to it but he makes clear that we want a deal:
We are back to cake-and-eat fantasy. We want all the advantages of trading with the EU as a member of the single market without any of the responsibilities and we will never get it.
Reading his speech is like time traveling back to 2017 when David Davis was going around Europe making similar speeches and the government was publishing position papers explaining how close we were and emphasising our shared values, suggesting everything should remain as it is now.
A few extracts:
"Too often the integrity of the single market is presented as a concern about the Good Friday Agreement, as if these two issues are the same. In fact, the single market is clearly the priority for the EU, meaning that it is the EU that will insist on putting up a hard border in the event of a no deal."
"Likewise the UK is often asked for more detail on its proposals. Yet if the test is one of 100% certainty, all-weather, all-of-life insurance, then creative and flexible solutions will always be quickly shot down. Progress requires creativity and flexibility on both sides – including in the application of single market rules. We recognise the concern about the risk of a backdoor to the single market, but we need to deal with it in a different way, one which reflects the value of democracy that we share."
Barnier, if he was there, must have had his head in his hands at this point. It was an admission that we don't have any realistic, workable, operable alternative arrangements and as a soon-to-be ex-member we want the EU to change the single market rules - or at least 'the application' of them. He wants to "look at this issue afresh as partners" because if not...
".. and we move to a no deal exit, people will question in the future why there was such a lack of flexibility, and indeed why, in the pursuit of a 100 per cent guarantee of no risk on the Irish border at the end of 2020, we made real this risk in November."
In other words it will be the fault of the EU for being inflexible not the UK for being inflexible.
He talks about the fishing, car and other industries:
"Take fishing for example, in the event of a no deal exit access to UK waters falls entirely within the UK’s control. That, of course, has a potential impact on the French fishing industry. Of the 250,000 tonnes of fish processed in Boulogne, the majority comes from UK waters and of the fish landed by French vessels, 40 per cent of it comes from UK waters.
"At the same time, about 80,000 tonnes of our own salmon, scallops and other seafood products end up on the French table each year - you are a significant export market for us.
"The exceptional fluidity of the cross-Channel trade routes supports the fishing industry, just as it does the car industry with its “just in time” supply chains. That fluidity sees more than 1,100 trucks cross seamlessly into the UK from the Continent each day laden with car parts. There are, of course, other changes that will arise from a no deal.
"For example, Geographical Indicators. It’s worth recognising that there are over 3,000 products registered with GIs in the EU but only 88 are from the UK. Or in agriculture where, according to France’s biggest farming union, French wine and spirits producers would be materially impacted. They’re set to have a €1.3bn annual surplus in trade with the UK.
"Or France’s dairy industry which - according to the French Chambers of Agriculture - has an annual surplus in exports to the UK of €700-800m.
"Monsieur President these are just some of the areas that it is our job – as politicians and business leaders – not just to protect but allow to flourish".
Barclay wants trade to 'flourish' by erecting barriers and adding friction to it but he makes clear that we want a deal:
"So I conclude by reaffirming that I, the Prime Minister, the British Government are aiming for a deal. We will be ready for no deal if it happens, but from the meetings I have had here this morning and those in Denmark, Finland and Sweden last week, one thing is absolutely clear.
"Businesses across Europe want an end to the uncertainty and have the confidence to take advantage of the huge opportunities that trading with the UK presents. That is best served with a deal. A deal which honours the Belfast/Good Friday Agreement but without the backstop as the UK Parliament has made clear.
"That is what our Government seeks, and Mr President, with good will on all sides it is what we can deliver."
We are back to cake-and-eat fantasy. We want all the advantages of trading with the EU as a member of the single market without any of the responsibilities and we will never get it.
