Politics.co.uk: The break-up of the UK is coming - but will it be violent or peaceful?

 Contrary to the current talk of the British empire and the nostalgia around it, they are not Powellites. Their overriding concern instead is the restoration of the Westminster system. For them, our EU membership has been an historical parenthesis. Westminster is all. A century ago, ceding part of Ireland was a price worth paying for keeping the Westminster system intact. So was the loss of India, and the loss of the colonies in the 1950s and early 1960s. Today, next year, whenever, Northern Ireland will follow.

The more troubling question is whether the Brexiters see Scotland in the same way, and whether their view of Scottish independence is the same as that of Unionists south and north of the border. Scotland is a nation of the United Kingdom, not a province that can be snapped off and tacked on to another state. It can only become separate by becoming independent and sovereign. [...]

That project's mode of governance is not the centralised one the less intellectual Brexiters constantly moan about, but actually about subsidiarity - decisions being made at the most local feasible level. By contrast, the heart and distinctiveness of the Westminster system is centralisation. Scottish nationalists believe Scotland would be freer to act autonomously within a federal, decentralised European Union than they are with devolution inside a unitary state.

read the article

read the article

The Prospect Interview #150: Hard Brexit now?

 The Times journalist Rachel Sylvester joins the Prospect Interview to get us up to date about the state of Brexit talks. She also introduces the man behind Britain’s negotiating table, David Frost. Is a hard Brexit inevitable, and what can Frost’s little-known background reveal about where Britain goes next?

listen to the podcast

UnHerd: Enoch Powell reconsidered

 “Throughout his political career,” Corthorn notes, “Powell grappled with what is arguably still the central issue in British foreign policy: the precise nature of the UK’s role in the world.” Yet, as a result of what Corthorn characterises as “a deeply polarized, and politicized, historiography”, Powell’s potential contribution to today’s debate has been minimised, a failing his excellent new book seeks to rectify, recentring Powell’s turbulent career as “part of a long-running and wide-ranging public debate over the ‘decline’ of the British nation”. [...]

The loss of India and Britain’s consequent diminished place in the world became the central pole of Powell’s worldview; the bloodshed of Partition fuelled his later fears both of mass immigration and of civil war in Northern Ireland, convincing him that “communalism and democracy, as the experience of India demonstrates, are incompatible”. His entire political career after 1947 would be devoted to defining, with an obsessive clarity not far from madness, the nature of British sovereignty in this new post-imperial world. [...]

Praising de Gaulle for pulling France out of NATO, Powell foreshadowed the French strongman’s modern heir Macron in eyeing Russia as the counterweight to preserve his own nation’s strategic autonomy, asserting that “historically the existence of Russia has been the ultimate guarantee of the survival of Britain as an independent nation… When in the last decades of the twentieth century necessity restores an understanding between Britain and Russia, the entente will not be cordiale; but entente it will still be…” As Corthorn notes laconically, at the height of the Cold War, “Powell’s argument for an alliance with the Soviet Union was a radical one to make. [...]

As for Brexit, Powell’s eventual, fierce opposition to the European Union would please many of the Conservative Party’s Brexiteers, yet his ridiculing of the Global Britain “delusions and deceits of a vanished Empire and Commonwealth” and his total and absolute hatred of the United States would have few takers in the modern Tory party. Perhaps it is here, as a foreign policy realist, that Powell’s uncompromising vision speaks most clearly to modern concerns.

read the article

TLDR Explains: Johnson's 30 Mile Bridge: Connecting Scotland and N. Ireland

For a while now Johnson has been talking about building a 30 mile bridge from Scotland to Northern Ireland. This rather out there plan might be possible, if the UK is willing to spend enough money to make it happen. In this video we discuss the viability of the plan and why Johnson wants to do it at all.

The Economist: Why Britain's election won't end the political chaos (Dec 12, 2019)

Britain, a land of green pastures, tea drinking and centuries of political stability until now. The British people are heading to the polls for the fourth time in five years to try to break the deadlock over how to leave the European Union. But this election is unlikely to heal Britain’s divided politics.

Before the Brexit referendum, Britain had enjoyed decades of relative political stability with one of the Conservatives or Labour almost always in power. But their success was built on increasingly shaky foundations. One study found that British voters’ trust in government suffered a long decline from 1986 until 2012. And two events in particular became emblematic of that loss of trust.

And then a few years later the elite appeared to be proven wrong again. The financial crisis of 2008 challenged the competence of Britain’s ruling class.

These two events began to undermine the political centre on which both Labour’s Tony Blair and the Conservatives' David Cameron had built their success. The collapse in trust in this elite then gave way to active revolt. The election of Jeremy Corbyn as leader of the Labour Party signalled a rejection of the ruling consensus and a decisive shift to the left. Then in 2016 the public had their opportunity to turn on the establishment. [...]

Europe Elects: Alliance Party of Northern Ireland | APNI | UK, Parliament Election 2019

This is the YouTube service of Europe Elects. Poll aggregation and election analysis for countries in the European Union. Europe Elects introduces the main political parties ahead of the 12 December 2019 parliament election in the UK.

Europe Elects: Sinn Féin | SF | UK, Parliament Election 2019

This is the YouTube service of Europe Elects. Poll aggregation and election analysis for countries in the European Union. Europe Elects introduces the main political parties ahead of the 12 December 2019 parliament election in the UK.

The Atlantic: Is Boris Johnson Actually Winning?

Politically, winning is short-term and transactional: It involves setting the question you want voters to answer—and getting them to respond in the way you want, all in the service of winning elections. If successful, you gain the power necessary to achieve the things you want to do and to stop the things you do not. This is the game as played by political strategists across the world, including those most central to Johnson’s electoral successes to date: Lynton Crosby and Dominic Cummings. With Brexit, it is no different. It’s just that the stakes on the table are much higher. [...]

Of course, there have been huge compromises. Johnson has conceded that Northern Ireland alone will align with EU standards, and appears to have conceded that actual border checks cannot take place along or near to the border with the Republic of Ireland. While no agreement has yet emerged—and may not—Johnson’s stance has produced enough movement from Dublin and Brussels to create a pathway to a deal. The solution reportedly under consideration (a complicated tariff arrangement that would see Northern Ireland remain legally part of the U.K.’s customs zone, while for practical purposes being treated as if it were part of the EU’s) is a rehashing of a May proposal for the whole of the U.K. that was rejected by the EU. That Brussels has not rejected Johnson’s plan is an achievement in and of itself.

Johnson’s political strategy at home is also showing early signs of success. In contrast to May, he has sought to control the agenda, setting a simple narrative in the public’s mind about what he is trying to achieve and why voters should not blame him if he fails. Like Donald Trump with the border wall with Mexico, he calculates that it is not failure that is punished by voters, but a lack of trying.

read the article

The Guardian: Brexit’s legacy for England will be politics as sectarian as Northern Ireland’s

To understand that this possible Ulsterisation of British politics is a genuinely serious prospect, step back a bit and consider the way that electoral behaviour has been evolving in Britain. Ever since 1964, political scientists, mainly based at Nuffield College, Oxford, have worked on the British Election Study (BES). For more than half a century they have tracked the decline of the old industrial-based two-party system in which general elections were fought between the Conservatives and Labour, who battled for the floating voters in the middle ground across the land.

Today’s electoral politics are fundamentally different. A long-term trend of dealignment from the two big parties means that voters are no longer loyal battalions of partisans. Millions of individual voters are now happy to switch between an increasing array of parties. In 2015, 43% of them voted for a different party from the one they had supported in 2010. In 2017, 33% switched from their 2015 vote. In 2019, a similar kaleidoscopic change seems certain. Tellingly, a BES study of these two recent elections, due for publication in December, will be titled Electoral Shocks: the Volatile Voter in a Turbulent World. [...]

Northern Ireland’s divides are rooted in centuries of religious divide. The Brexit divide in Britain is far more recent. But it is rooted in identities and anger, too. If Brexit does become the defining issue in mid-21st-century British politics, the hope of a country coming back together could be as fragile as the dream of Irish peace now is, and just as fraught.

read the article

The Guardian: Arlene Foster signals DUP shift on Northern Ireland border issue

In a break with previous rhetoric where she has strongly opposed treating the region differently to the rest of the UK, Foster said the final deal would have to recognise Northern Ireland’s unique historical and geographical position and the fact it will be the UK’s only land border with the EU.

Asked by reporters if it was possible to see Northern Ireland-only solutions that would not affect the constitutional link with Great Britain, she replied: “Well I hope so.” [...]

She made clear that her idea of an acceptable Northern Ireland-only solution was different to mooted proposals for a Northern Ireland-only backstop, which she said “would bring about customs [checks] between Great Britain and Northern Ireland and that is unconstitutional and undemocratic”. [...]

Echoing words of the party’s chief whip Sir Jeffrey Donaldson earlier this week, she said the solution lay in a joint letter she co-authored with the late leader of Sinn Féin, Martin McGuinness, in August 2016, a document rarely referred to by the DUP in the past two years.

read the article

BBC4 Analysis: Understanding the risks of terrorism

With unprecedented access to the work of MI5, Dominic Casciani asks how the security services, business and the public should perceive and respond to the threat of terrorism.

listen to the podcast

TLDR News: What Deal Does the EU Want From Brexit?

There's been a lot of talk, on this channel and elsewhere, about what kind of Brexit deal the UK wants. There's been significantly less conversation about what the EU wants out of it. So in this video, we discuss what the EU27 want from Brexit (and more specifically what France, Germany and Ireland are looking for).

TLDR News: What Johnson's Cabinet Reshuffle Mean For Brexit

On Thursday night, Boris Johnson selected his new cabinet in the biggest reshuffle in recent memory. Cabinet selections really indicate what kind of people the Prime Minister wants to surround themselves with, what kind of strategies they will be using. So in this video, we will be discussing who Johnson chose, and what this might indicate about his Brexit plans.

The Guardian: MPs vote to extend abortion and same-sex marriage rights to Northern Ireland

The changes came via amendments to an otherwise technical government bill connected to budgets and elections for the devolved assembly. In the first amendment, tabled by the Labour MP Conor McGinn, a longstanding campaigner for equal marriage in Northern Ireland, the Commons voted 383 to 73 to extend it to the region.

In a vote soon afterwards, MPs approved an amendment by another Labour MP, Stella Creasy, to extend abortion rights to Northern Ireland, the only part of the UK where it remains illegal. The vote was passed by 332 to 9.

Both were free votes as they were viewed as matters of conscience. While the Northern Ireland minister, John Penrose, who spoke for the government, warned MPs that both potential changes would be fraught with complications, he voted in favour of both amendments.[...]

The votes could also affect efforts to revive the executive and assembly at Stormont. While Naomi Long, the Alliance leader, said they could unlock the talks, others speculated that Sinn Féin, which supports social liberalisation, now has an incentive to delay the restoration of devolution to let the amendments take effect.

read the article

The Guardian: Grieve: proroguing parliament would be end of democracy in UK

Speaking on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, Grieve said the amendment calls for “regular motions before parliament in September and particularly October”. If passed, it would prevent the parliamentary session being prorogued, or abruptly ended, in the lead-up to the 31 October departure date.

“If you decide that parliament is an inconvenience, when in fact it is the place where democratic legitimacy lies in our constitution, and therefore it’s acceptable to get rid of it for a period because it might otherwise [stop] you from doing something that parliament would prevent, then it’s the end of democracy.”[...]

Grieve was backed by the Conservative former foreign secretary William Hague, who told Today: “I think it’s very important that parliament is able to give its opinion. It ought to be unthinkable that we could leave the EU by a manoeuvre, by a procedural ruse of some kind.

read the article

The Guardian Politics Weekly: Is a no-deal Brexit back on the cards?

Heather Stewart is joined by Jonathan Freedland, Owen Jones and Rachel Wolf to discuss the latest Tory leadership pledges, the new intake of European MEPs and same-sex marriage in Northern Ireland.

As Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt do their utmost to drive the country off a no-deal cliff edge, business leaders, fellow politicians and the rest of the world look on aghast.

While the Thelma and Louise of British politics wrestle over the steering wheel, we ask: are we really going to leave the EU without a deal?

Joining Heather Stewart are the Guardian’s Jonathan Freedland and Owen Jones, and Rachel Wolf from the consultancy Public First.

Also this week: it was a lively start to the opening of the European parliament, with protests, back-turning and rude T-shirts. We talk to one of the new crop of MEPs, Caroline Voaden of the Liberal Democrats, and to the Guardian’s Brussels bureau chief, Daniel Boffey.

listen to the podcast

Politico: Tory members prepared to break up party, United Kingdom for Brexit

Asked whether they would rather stay in the EU if Brexit would lead to Scotland or Northern Ireland breaking away from the U.K., 63 percent and 59 percent of party members (respectively) said they would prefer the United Kingdom break up. [...]

There's only one thing most Tory members couldn't stomach in their pursuit of Brexit: A Prime Minister Jeremy Corbyn. Fifty-one percent said they'd rather stay in the bloc than allow the Labour leader to move into No. 10 Downing Street, though 39 percent said it was a price they were willing to pay.

Just over half of Tory members said they thought Britain remaining in the EU would damage their party so much it would never lead the country again, while 52 percent said leaving the bloc would mean victory for their party at the next election.

read the article

The New York Review of Books: ‘Nostalgia Serves No Purpose’: An Interview with Michel Barnier

Born in 1951, Michel Barnier joined the French Gaullist party, the RPR, at fifteen. Unlike most high-level French administrators and politicians, Barnier is not a product of the École Nationale d’Administration; in fact, he graduated from the École Supérieure de Commerce in Paris. He first won public recognition in France for coordinating preparations for the 1992 Winter Olympics in the Alpine town of Albertville. He went on to serve as a minister for the environment, and then for European affairs. Later, he became minister for foreign affairs, until losing his job when French voters rejected the European Union’s new Constitutional Treaty in a 2005 referendum. The shock of that result, and a similar one in the Netherlands, might have served as a cautionary tale for Prime Minister David Cameron’s government. (France later accepted a new version of the treaty agreement, after the election of President Nicolas Sarkozy in 2007, by parliamentary assent.) [...]

This is the reason that the EU is so complex. It’s clearly possible to work here in Brussels with more democracy, less bureaucracy, but it will still remain complex—as it [the EU] wants to be united rather than uniform. This [compromise and negotiation] is the price we have to pay. We don’t want to become one nation or one people. There is no ambition to build a distinct and homogeneous federal state. We are twenty-eight, in a few months probably twenty-seven, with twenty-four languages. [...]

Looking at the causes of Brexit, we also find typically British reasons: the hope for a return to a powerful global Britain, nostalgia for the past—nostalgia serves no purpose in politics. In my country, too, some politicians still prefer to live in the past. But there were, also, people voting for Brexit who simply don’t want to accept rules. Some based in the City of London voted to leave, as they don’t want to accept the Union’s regulations on their trading; they want to speculate freely and the Union doesn’t allow them to do so. [...]

t’s a question of the fundamental reality of the single market, which is not a supermarket. Freedom of movement for goods, services, capital and, most importantly, freedom of movement for people are fundamental to the single market. The EU is not only an economic project; it’s also a political project. It’s also much more than a free-trade zone. The single market is a social, economic, and legal ecosystem, where, between twenty-eight countries, we have decided to live together, adopt the same standards and protection for consumers. Therefore, we cannot agree to cherry-picking.

read the article

Reuters: Northern Irish party surges in EU poll, seeks Brexit referendum

The vote also indicated increasing support for candidates not aligned to the traditional Catholic or Protestant voting blocs. It was the best national showing for the Alliance Party, which was founded almost 50 years ago, just as Northern Ireland’s violent period known as “The Troubles” deepened.[...]

The vote also indicated increasing support for candidates not aligned to the traditional Catholic or Protestant voting blocs. It was the best national showing for the Alliance Party, which was founded almost 50 years ago, just as Northern Ireland’s violent period known as “The Troubles” deepened.[...]

Northern Ireland still overwhelmingly votes along traditional lines two decades after a peace deal ended 30 years of sectarian violence, choosing mainly Catholic nationalists who favour a united Ireland or predominantly Protestant unionists who want to remain British.

read the article

The Guardian view on abortion: protecting a human right

No law can end abortions, however severe its restrictions and however harsh its penalties. Each day almost 70,000 unsafe abortions are carried out around the world, and they are vastly more likely to happen in countries with strict laws. What such legislation does do is force some women to continue pregnancies against their wishes, while risking the lives and wellbeing of others. Women in the US have seen their ability to terminate pregnancies dismantled piece by piece. Now states are racing to outlaw or dramatically curb abortions with extreme and unconstitutional bills. The aim is to directly challenge Roe v Wade, the US supreme court ruling that established that abortion is legal before the foetus is viable outside the womb, at around 24 weeks. Last Tuesday, the governor of Georgia signed a bill essentially banning abortions after six weeks from 2020. Some described it as a sign that men who wish to control women’s bodies have no idea of how they actually work. More likely, those who pushed hardest for the change understand all too well that many women will not know they are pregnant until it is too late.

Five other states have signed similar bills; several more are considering them. (Others have introduced more incremental curbs.) The Alabama senate will this week consider a near-total ban on abortion – with prison sentences of up to 99 years for doctors – which Republicans initially tried to sneak through without even a vote. The state’s lieutenant governor said he believes Roe v Wade will be overturned thanks to Donald Trump’s appointment of conservative jurists. [...]

At this grim time there are signs of hope. New York state has sought to bolster abortion rights this year. Chile somewhat eased its ban in 2017. And last year’s landslide vote in favour of repealing Ireland’s near-total ban resonated worldwide. Yet women in Northern Ireland are no closer to enjoying the same rights as those elsewhere in the UK, even though the supreme court believes the ban there incompatible with human rights legislation. They can now access free abortion care in England, but too much confusion endures and women in abusive relationships, for example, may not be able to travel. Because this is a devolved issue, the right of women to control their own bodies is yet another casualty of the collapse of power-sharing. Northern Ireland’s politicians must find a way to work together again. When they do, overturning this cruel ban must be a priority.

read the article