Sir Bill Cash has written a typically incoherent piece in The Telegraph about the Windsor Framework and it's safe to say he isn't happy. Alongside him is Sammy Wilson, the DUP MP for East Antrim who is also throwing himself against Sunak's much-trumpeted deal. All this is a sideshow of course to the steady drip of Matt Hancock's damaging WhatsApp messages during the height of the COVID pandemic, courtesy of Isabel Oakeshott, Richard Tice's partner. Tice is the wealthy idiot atop the Reform Party which is seeking to steal as many Tory votes as possible at the next general election.
It is all very dangerous for Sunak.
But back to Sir Bill, the well-known buffoon who has spent 38 years on the back benches without ever holding ministerial office, although listening to him, that is hardly a shock is it? His article (no£) is: Rishi Sunak has questions to answer on the true nature of his Protocol deal
He says NI has been subjected to around 670 new EU laws since Brexit without any involvement from Westminster or Northern Ireland MPs, laws "made behind closed doors by majority vote of the European Council of Ministers without even a transcript."
This, Cash says, "is not democratic consent – no other democratic country in the world would accept this, and the so-called Stormont brake is underwhelmingly inconsistent with the full constitutional consent demanded by the Northern Ireland Protocol and the Good Friday Agreement."
He wants Sunak to address the "accumulating uncertainties, risks and criticisms" about the deal so that parliament can see if the claims made for it "are justified in the national interest." After the last seven years, I am not sure that any Tory MP is in a position to judge the national interest.
But, at the same time, Cash takes a swipe at "Conservative backbench Remainers working with the opposition to frustrate progress on our withdrawal from the EU." This is during 2018-19 I assume when Mrs. May was trying to make Brexit mean something. What were the MPs doing then if they were not judging the national interests? Of course, what Cash means by the national interest is whatever he personally believes is right.
Next, Sammy Wilson, and this might amuse you. His article is: Rishi Sunak's Brexit deal is more threadbare than reckless Tories will admit (again, no £paywall). In it, he mentions one MP in last Monday's debate on the WF:
"One even congratulated the PM on a 'spectacular negotiating success', commenting that the 'Stormont brake on EU law is a brilliant piece of negotiating insight and imagination', and then without the slightest embarrassment asked the PM to explain 'how exactly it would work'."
Now I bet you're wondering which MP it was, eh? Don't worry, I checked in Hansard and I can reveal it's none other than David Davis MP for Howden and Haltemprice. This is the full thing:
"I start by unreservedly congratulating my right hon. Friend on what seems to be a spectacular negotiating success. With the Windsor framework, he has succeeded in delivering a deal that eliminates the issues of the Irish sea border and addresses the practical issues in Northern Ireland on food, pets, plants, parcels, medicine regulations, and tax rules. Above all, it introduces the extraordinary mechanism of the Stormont brake. I am unaware of any such mechanism in any international agreement, and it seems to me to be a brilliant piece of negotiating insight and imagination. As we do not all know the detail, can he explain to the House exactly how this mechanism will work and what its limitations will be?"
Wilson and Cash are not convinced that the Stormont brake is a "brilliant piece of negotiating insight and imagination" as described by Davis who had not even read it!! How can anyone have any faith in our MPs and in particular Davis? He was the one who told us there wouldn't be a single downside to Brexit. The deal doesn't even 'eliminate' the Irish sea border issues, it actually cements them permanently into place.
Wilson asks, in relation to the brake, which can only be used in exceptional circumstances anyway, "does anyone really believe that the UK government would risk a trade war with the EU to oppose EU law changes in Northern Ireland?" And you have to say he's right.
He also notes that 100% of loads coming into Northern Ireland will be "subject to paperwork checks, although the customs paperwork will be reduced and there will be a minimum of 5% physical checks. This is for the movement of goods within the UK. When the destination of the goods cannot be guaranteed, they will be subject to full EU customs checks. Against this background, the rhetoric of frictionless trade claimed by the PM looks fairly threadbare."
The EU's Maros Sefcovic hasn't helped to allay unionist fears by apparently claiming in private that the deal was simply designed to 'avoid negative headlines' in the British press and that it fails to take back full control. He is supposed to have "poured cold water over any suggestion Britain had secured an effective veto over new European laws that affect Northern Ireland and insisted the bloc’s top court would still rule supreme."
The WF is mainly a presentational thing to convince unionists.
As for Hancock's WhatsApp messages, they reveal the casual, almost jocular approach at the heart of Downing Street to what was the greatest threat to the UK population since WW2. Hancock seemed more concerned about his own public image than anything else.
Polling
The pollster Savanta has joined those adding to the series on WhatUKthinks, making 5 different organisations who have asked the question: was the UK was right or wrong to vote for Brexit? The results are in line with all the others, with 58% believing it was wrong, compared to 42% still thinking it was right. Excluding the don't knows, that is.
But more than that they asked a lot more questions about attitudes now compared to 2016. For example, overall 48 % thought the leave campaign was wrong in its claims about the impact of Brexit and just 25% thought they were right. Bizarrely, in the over-65 age group, the figures were even worse. In that group, 53% thought the leave campaign was wrong against just 23% who thought they were right!
This is really odd since of that 65+ group 55% would still vote to stay out while just 39% thought we should rejoin. Either they believe Brexit has gone so well, the leave campaign didn’t paint a bright enough picture in 2016 or they think things are really bad but we should just carry on anyway. It makes no sense.
And 45% thought the remain campaign told the truth or were right in their predictions, while 33% thought they were wrong.
It’s a good poll of over 2500 people and well worth a read. See it HERE.
