The Internal Market bill is now threatening to sour relations not just with the EU but with the US as well. Although it passed 2nd reading on Monday with a health majority of 77, I am beginning to believe it will not make it to the statute book unscathed and the government will have suffered the worst possible outcome. It will have demonstrated clear bad faith, got nothing in return, stiffened the resolve of the EU and probably ensured Brussels will demand stronger guarantees on LPF, governance and other issues. A sort of quadruple and unnecessary whammy.
Four US Congressmen have written an open letter to Boris Johnson:
.@10DowningStreet very cavalier on this - essentially thought neither public nor rest of world would care, that they'd see IM bill as an “internal issue” with EU. Big miscalculation https://t.co/8fWTKDVUq2— Mujtaba Rahman (@Mij_Europe) September 16, 2020
They talk of "grave concern" about government efforts "to invalidate or override" the NI protocol and again warn there will be no trade deal if the "legally questionable and unfair efforts" to flout the agreement are not abandoned.
From the tweet above, Mutjaba Rahman a former Treasury and EU official who claims to have close contacts with Downing Street believes Cummings and Johnson have underestimated the impact of the UKIM bill. The dreams of total independence have been well and truly shattered.
I suspect Cummings will not be bothered in the least. He is a megalomaniac with utter disdain for the law or conventions of any kind and thinks this is what has held Britain back. But plenty of others in the Tory party will and probably Johnson as well. Peers will certainly take note.
The government think the Salisbury convention applies to the UKIM bill, which dictates that the Lord's usually do not block legislation that is contained in the government's manifesto. Here peers may well feel they are upholding the convention by blocking that which is not in a manifesto:
The Irish border question is still without an answer. A land border is out of the question and no amount of tough talking will change that, as the American's letter shows.
Peter Bone was on television recently suggesting (again) that even if we flout the WA and don't implement the NI protocol properly, fully or at all, "nobody" is going to put up a land border as if the UK government will dare the EU to do it. This is dangerous stuff and it won't work anyway.
Outside the CU and the SM a border MUST be erected somewhere. His government won the referendum on a "take back control" of our borders ticket and have won two further elections on it, the EU will insist on some sort of border and so will the WTO - otherwise both the EU and the UK will face demands to throw open their borders to all other WTO members.
The solution Johnson agreed to with his fingers crossed behind his back is the ONLY way to leave the single market/CU and avoid a hard land border. However unpalatable now, he is going to have to implement it with every detail of the NI protocol being observed.
It is also the ONLY way we will avoid leaving the transition period with no trade deal with the EU and no prospect of one with the USA.
From the tweet above, Mutjaba Rahman a former Treasury and EU official who claims to have close contacts with Downing Street believes Cummings and Johnson have underestimated the impact of the UKIM bill. The dreams of total independence have been well and truly shattered.
I suspect Cummings will not be bothered in the least. He is a megalomaniac with utter disdain for the law or conventions of any kind and thinks this is what has held Britain back. But plenty of others in the Tory party will and probably Johnson as well. Peers will certainly take note.
The government think the Salisbury convention applies to the UKIM bill, which dictates that the Lord's usually do not block legislation that is contained in the government's manifesto. Here peers may well feel they are upholding the convention by blocking that which is not in a manifesto:
It will certainly test the convention in a unique way. The government is after all going back on a clear manifesto commitment to implement the NI protocol and "get Brexit done."But the Lords would be following the convention if it rejected the bill because it supplants what was in the Tory manifesto. https://t.co/nR4qFDXbXD— Mike Smithson (@MSmithsonPB) September 15, 2020
The Irish border question is still without an answer. A land border is out of the question and no amount of tough talking will change that, as the American's letter shows.
Peter Bone was on television recently suggesting (again) that even if we flout the WA and don't implement the NI protocol properly, fully or at all, "nobody" is going to put up a land border as if the UK government will dare the EU to do it. This is dangerous stuff and it won't work anyway.
Outside the CU and the SM a border MUST be erected somewhere. His government won the referendum on a "take back control" of our borders ticket and have won two further elections on it, the EU will insist on some sort of border and so will the WTO - otherwise both the EU and the UK will face demands to throw open their borders to all other WTO members.
The solution Johnson agreed to with his fingers crossed behind his back is the ONLY way to leave the single market/CU and avoid a hard land border. However unpalatable now, he is going to have to implement it with every detail of the NI protocol being observed.
It is also the ONLY way we will avoid leaving the transition period with no trade deal with the EU and no prospect of one with the USA.
