Guardian brings weekly good news of disruption and coups

There's a new weekly roundup of Brexit news frm the Gruna. Lovers of good news can even get it via email. Here's a bit of this week's:

Best of the rest

• Surge in EU citizens unfairly refused access to universal credit.
• Low-income Britons ‘more vulnerable to recession than in 2008’.
• Edinburgh festival performers refuse sterling payments due to Brexit.
• UK less able to cope with hard Brexit than it was in spring, say officials.
• UK manufacturing ‘suffocating’ as output slips to seven-year low.
• BMW boss urges Boris Johnson to abandon no-deal Brexit.
• Labour would be ‘off our rockers’ not to back remain in poll, says Thornberry.
• We’ll block trade deal if Brexit imperils open Irish border, say US politicians.
• Brexit causes UK car industry investment to crash to ‘pitiful’ £90m.
• No-deal Brexit would endanger rural life, says Welsh leader.

Meanwhile V Bogdanor offers some expert advice for coup organisers, with the cheerful headline:

MPs can still thwart Boris Johnson over no deal. Here’s how

 there are, in theory, five ways in which the Commons could act.

First, it could legislate to require the prime minister to seek a further extension. The EU27 would then have to decide by unanimity whether to grant it, and under what conditions. Second, it could legislate to prevent the government from leaving without a deal.But that would in effect repeal the act withdrawing Britain from the EU, since if the Commons were then to reject every deal put to it, the UK would remain in the EU ad infinitum.[I'd not realized that implication! It's not clear if he approves of that or not] ...Third, the Commons could legislate for a referendum before Brexit [Would there be time?] . Fourth, it could legislate to repeal the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act and reinstate the European Communities Act, in which case the UK would remain in the EU....Finally, the Commons could vote no confidence in the government. There might then be either an alternative government prepared to delay or prevent Brexit or a general election.

It turns out that each alternative actually has real problems, insuperable in normal conditions.

Of the five, all but the last require the Commons to take control of the legislative process. That could be achieved by the Commons agreeing to suspend standing order 14, which gives priority to government business. In April the Cooper-Letwin bill, which passed third reading by one vote, did precisely that, requiring Theresa May to seek an extension to the Brexit date to avoid a no-deal Brexit....But any legislation designed to postpone or prevent Brexit has public spending implications. For were the UK to stay in the EU beyond 31 October it would have to make further budget contributions. [That would be very popular!] But standing order 48 requires any charge on public revenue to be recommended by the crown, which, for practical purposes, means a government minister responsible to parliament and through parliament to the people, not backbenchers. So that standing order too would have to be suspended....The practical difficulties would be enormous. Backbenchers would have to steer the relevant legislation through all of its stages in the Commons, and deal with a host of amendments in committee together with endless filibustering by enraged Brexiteers.

a no-confidence vote can only be moved by the leader of the opposition, Jeremy Corbyn...there is a 14-day window in which to find an alternative government capable of securing the confidence of the Commons. A Corbyn government would be unlikely to secure that confidence. Conservatives, the DUP and Liberal Democrats would vote against it. Another possibility, however, would be a government of national unity to forestall Brexit, led perhaps by someone such as Yvette Cooper or Keir Starmer...[but the Queen] ...would need a cast-iron guarantee in writing from a majority of MPs that they would support a government of national unity under a named prime minister. [And what on earth would the electorate think?]

The alternative is a general election, which would inevitably take on the character of a second referendum. The election would be called by the prime minister following the closure of the 14-day window. After dissolution there must be 25 working days before the election. So if a vote of no-confidence took place on 5 September it could be held on 17 October just in time for the new parliament to prevent a no-deal Brexit...The trouble is that dissolution need not follow immediately after the 14-day window closes. Under section 2 (7) of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act it is for the prime minister to recommend a suitable election date to the Queen. Only when he has done so is the date of dissolution determined. Were Johnson to delay the election date beyond 31 October he would be accused of acting unconstitutionally, but it would not be unlawful.

Then a damp squib to end:

The caretaker convention dictates that no alteration of policy should occur during the pre-election period. Suppose the Commons had clearly indicated that it was opposed to a no-deal Brexit. How should the convention then be interpreted? Constitutionally, there is no clear answer. The logic of democracy [!] suggests that the people should decide.

Very convenient that 'logic of democracy'. It permits backbenchers to take control of the order paper, even to impose a GNU which no-one has voted for, led by people who have not been elected even by a small group of party members.
 

Liberals just do not get tactical confrontation

S Jenkins is often a perceptive analyst and has written quite reasonably rational copy about Brexit, despite Remaining, at least until recently. His latest piece shows that he, as much as J Corbyn, have an aversion to any form of negotiation that isn't sitting round a table with a cup of tea being reasonable, and just do not understand confrontation

Johnson is blatantly campaigning  ...[but should really be] in Dublin, the city that holds the key to somehow resolving the Irish backstop and averting a no-deal Brexit.

OK first point is that Government officials probably are 'in Dublin', i.e. talking to Irish official and politicians backstage. To back that up, Johnson is quite rightly indulging in the other part of successful negotiation -- pursuing displays of power to moralise his side (and himself)  and issuing nonspecific threats.

Jenkins wants things kept nice and tidy as in the EC rulebook and will brook no exceptions:

Jeffrey Donaldson, chief whip of the Democratic Unionist party in Westminster, on whose goodwill Johnson wholly relies in the Commons, has dictated that “our bottom line is no hard border on the island of Ireland and no new border between Britain and Northern Ireland”. These are blatantly incompatible. You cannot both be in a customs union and outside it.

But there are already border-like differences between NI and the Republic -- different currency, different laws. People cheerfully travel and work across this 'border', we are told. The real block is EC protectionism and fears of widespread smuggling, already dealt with across many other borders. Varadkar and the EC have weaponised the issue by linking it with Good Friday, and the EC can brook no ambiguity. The current soft 'border' is not seen as dangerous, so why should any extension of it be? Do customs checks at ports have the same kind of symbolic significance and basic disruption that we are told haunts traffic barriers and armed border guards?

Jenkins knows this:

The only conceivable way through is some fudge to define “hard border” as somehow a soft one. [just as Good Friday did] It must still be a border, but at least some verbal compromise might kick the can down the road.

Who is against such a compromise? The UK, even under May, advocated this and said it would never impose a new hard border. Jenkins wants to ignore the role of the EC and do the easier thing --  kick Johnson and support the gallant Celts:

The compromise can come from only one quarter, Ireland’s prime minister, Leo Varadkar. Yet Johnson has not had the guts to meet him....Only Varadkar can reassure the 27 EU states that a transitional UK withdrawal agreement is feasible. He and Johnson must do a deal, and desperately soon.

Of course, the 27 EU states might want to urge Varadkar to make a deal too. The British and Irish Governments and the EU are no doubt exploring a deal away from the public gaze. Why should Jenkins suddenly get impressed by silly symbolism whereby Johnson must go to Dublin and the two leaders participate in one of those staged meetings for TV like Trump and Putin? This sort of show is also campaigning really.

Jenkins ends with a very old-fashioned conspiracy theory. Why does Parliament [somehow] not insist the two leaders meet?

Britain’s supposed leaders are currently in the grip of two followers of Leon Trotsky – namely Cummings and Jeremy Corbyn’s chief strategist Seumus Milne.

That confrontation might help concentrate EC minds is demonstrated in the Times today (subscription still required):

It is not just British jobs that are at risk from a no-deal Brexit. As the clock counts down to October 31, everyone from French fishermen to German car workers is hoping an agreement can be reached

Belgian officials admit that the government will have an uphill struggle to convince the country’s voters that the economic impact of no-deal is a price worth paying to preserve the principle of solidarity with Ireland and the integrity of the single market.

Of course, threats from one side bring forth threats from the other.In this case, France is threatening to ban UK fish exports. In an older case,the threat by Democrat US Congresspeople to block a trade deal with the USA if the Irish are cross was met with a declaration by Republican Congresspeople that they would help the UK in any way possible.

We shall see who the Owl of Minerva craps on first.

Guardian approves of Dark Arts for Remain*

No real surprises there, of course. Today's edition features a dubiously self-promoting piece by a Dark Artist; 'Ian Warren is director of the consultancy Election Data' Iif it were  Cambridge Analytica, the shock and horror would be clear, but this Artist supports Remain so it goes uncriticized. Much of it agrees with standard Graun writers' views of the poor dim emotional herd that voted for Leave and the need for more emotional appeals because that is all they can understand -- but this breaks some new ground The subheading says it all really:

Messages from on high are useless – we need simple emotional messages that move people and can be easily shared 

It illustrates perfectly the cultural politics of the petit-bourgeois by rebuking the elite first:

People get on with their lives without the Today programme. They’re not reading that 124-page report on no deal. They’re not watching when you take to the stage to deliver a speech to a packed room at a thinktank in Whitehall. Nobody’s watching except those you don’t need to persuade and who won’t be affected by the catastrophe your report outlines. So don’t be surprised when the majority of the electorate either don’t know what no deal means or, worse, think it’s going to be OK.... Delivering vertical messages from an elite source direct to individuals is no longer effective

But the usual contempt for popular politics is not far behind:

we are going to need to employ techniques that identify the target audiences we need to reach. More importantly, the message we carry needs to be less about clever debating points and more about identifying the emotional triggers that inspire people to carry the message for us. Words of two syllables at most. Messages of 10 words or fewer.

Then it gets downright manipulative:

I found that it is possible to identify the base emotional triggers that invoke and dictate our subsequent behaviours, including whether we vote and whom we vote for. Such emotions are often hardwired unconscious traits over which we have limited control. The next stage was to deploy techniques that sought to convert whatever progressive messages I could find into consumable chunks aimed specifically at exploiting those unconscious traits. 

I think we might know one example of his work, although he doesn't claim authorship:

“Bollocks to Brexit” from the Liberal Democrats was a promising retort, ironically called out as crude populism by some progressives. Actually, it was ruthlessly effective.

As usual, no evidence is provided for its ruthless effectiveness -- exposure? Number of posts on FB? Whatever their external political differences, the Dark Artists are united in their cultural targets and  ridiculous claims.

Brexit causes mass school failure

The Observer leads with this story.  Shouty headlines and weaker copy with the added spice of being based on a leak:

Secret report reveals government fear of schools chaos after no-deal Brexit 

Schools may have to close, exams could be disrupted and fresh food for pupils’ meals could run short because of panic buying with prices soaring by up to 20%, according to a secret Department for Education analysis of the risks of a no-deal Brexit obtained by the Observer...The five-page document – marked “Official Sensitive” and with the instruction “Do Not Circulate” – also raises the possibility of teacher absences caused by travel disruption, citing schools in Kent as particularly at risk...On the dangers of food shortages to schools, it suggests that informing the public of the risks could make matters even worse.

So the Observer promptly leaks it, of course. Lower down:

the document says: “In light of any food shortages or price increases we will communicate how schools can interpret the food menu standards flexibly. DfE may make exceptional payments – or submit a prepared bid to HM Treasury for additional funding. Worst case scenario estimate of the increased costs – £40 to £85m a year for schools in relation to free school meal provision based on price increases of 10-20%.”...Under a heading School Travel, the analysis makes clear that the potential problems are “not countrywide”, and cites Dover in Kent as at the highest risk of disruption, stating: “Risk of travel disruption could result in school and early years settings closures, pupil and staff absence and exam disruption (though to a lesser extent in Oct due to limited exams being sat).”

So is it Armageddon?

A DfE spokesperson said: “While we don’t comment on leaked documents, our … guidance to schools and other stakeholders already provides advice on EU exit preparations for schools, including food provision, medical supplies and guidance for EU nationals. We are confident provision for schools will be protected in the event of the UK having to leave the EU without an agreement and there are robust contingency plans in place to ensure schools are prepared in all eventualities.”

The Observer editorial has a classic smear tactic, uniting Trump andJohnson into one all-purpose right-wing populist movement,however vague and conditional:

Trump’s attempt to brand as unpatriotic extremists those progressives who seek to create a fairer, inclusive and more equal society is a familiar one in Britain. Johnson, trapped by his own hardline Brexit rhetoric and hounded from the right by Nigel Farage, is not above adopting a version of Trump’s divisive politics of identity and grievance if he thinks it will help him survive.

 How does the liberal-progressive left respond to the menace of immoral, unscrupulous rightwing populism, personified by Trump and the Johnson cabinet? [Via a bit of a damp squib] To defeat it, and resist the global rise of authoritarianism, liberals and progressives of all stripes must join forces around a programme of reform. In Britain, that means considering parliamentary and electoral coalitions of the willing, focused in the first instance on dispelling the Brexit nightmare.

The Observer is les clearabout how this tactical and opportunist stuff will meet the demand for

honest, practical leaders ready to shake things up and address vital issues of income inequality, healthcare, education, infrastructure and the climate crisis.

 

Buy your new BMW now, Grau urges its readers

A useful guide to how to act if there is a no-deal Brexit (don't you mean 'crashing out'?) in the Gruan today. Valuable advice includes:

[House prices] Buyers have a choice; defer a purchase until November to get clarity on Brexit (but if there is a deal, then prices could start moving up again) or make cheeky low-ball offers and see if a vendor is desperate enough to accept. How do you know a seller is desperate? One way is to search the property’s listing history...[Mortgages] hold your horses. As recently as 2016 mortgages were offered at rates as low 0.99% – a significant saving over the 1.3% to 1.7% best buys available this week....[Savings] move them into a fixed-rate bond that guarantees the rate for the bond’s term.[Currency] If you think the pound will continue to tumble, then buying your holiday money now makes sense, even at today’s depressed levels....If you want to take a punt against sterling and make some money by trading, all you need is a credit card and an initial deposit of around £100-£200 to join online forex traders such as eToro, City Index and so on.[Pensions] If you are convinced that a Boris Johnson-led Brexit is going to be a calamity, that the economy will tank and UK corporate profits collapse, then you can choose to shift your pension into overseas shares.

Ethically woke Graud readers don't buy shares directly, but some of them might have 'old privatisation and demutualisation shares'. What should they do? 'investors are wary of banks, and that they will never again be growth stocks, and you should hold them instead for a steady supply of dividends.'

Bad luck if you do not have a few old shares or other savings: 'Realistically, most people can do very little about the threat of job losses, particularly if they are in low-skilled positions.' So let's move on from these losers.

Back to the normal Graun reader: 

[On holiday in France, gendarmes] will want to see your UK driving licence, your international driving permit (IDP 1968), your insurance green card, the car’s log book (V5 document) and a GB sticker. Tourists flying into the EU and hiring a car will also need an IDP in several countries including Italy, France and the Netherlands. [But] The Post Office will sell you an IDP for £5.50 

 [Health] For those going on holiday, it is simply a case of buying travel insurance before you leave, and the government is advising just that.... [for Brits residing abroad] the UK government has said seeking bilateral agreements to maintain healthcare rights is a top priority....Medicine availability is what vexes people more seriously....Already there are reports of diabetics informally stockpiling their own supplies of insulin by giving themselves less on a daily basis...But the government says the fears are misplaced, as drug companies have already been told to build up an additional six weeks’ supply of medicines

[Prices] of some imports including meat, shoes and cars will go up. [Yes -- but what about English strawberries?] ...Among the consumer goods that will be hit are imports of beef, prices of which will go up by almost 7%, cheddar cheese, up by about £20 per 100kg, and imported fully finished cars, which would attract a 10.8% levy, or about £1,500 for an average new car....This suggests that if you have an eye on a new BMW or Mercedes, it might be worth bringing forward your purchase to before October... [For other goods]...the reality is that shops will absorb some of the increase or may substitute for domestically produced or alternative suppliers.

So -- what crisis? The average Graun readers can cope or even make a modest gain by shrewd and timely shopping 

However, they might still suffer some cultural angst. The yoof activist L Spirit, the 'co-president of Our Future Our Choice' asserts that:

The fanatical commitment of the Conservative membership to leaving the EU on 31 October, “do or die”, bears no resemblance to the wishes of the vast majority of young people, eight in 10 of whom want to resolve this crisis through a people’s vote.

There is real injury in Johnson's remarks:

A recent Barnardo’s report found that more young people think Brexit is an immediate threat to their future than is climate change. When Johnson wrote of the Extinction Rebellion protests in April that he was “utterly fed up with being told by nice young people that their opinions are more important than my own”, few would expect him to think otherwise for our concerns about Brexit.

Spirit is convinced that Brexit 'in any form...will leave us poorer, our opportunities fewer and our domestic priorities irrelevant amid the long-term political chaos that would follow.'

So, as usual, she actually wants to Remain rather than to have another referendum, of course. Moreover:

And even if young people were in fact in favour of Brexit, they would still reject Johnson. This is a politician who, regardless of his personal beliefs, is happy to dabble in misogyny, xenophobia and homophobia as far as it appeals to those whose support he needs. This is a man who has described women wearing the burqa as “letterboxes”, claimed “voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts” and described gay men as “tank-topped bumboys” [The last link leads to a full list of 'outrageous Johnson quotes' in Newsweek]...His values are the antithesis of a forward-looking generation who want to see borders eradicated, [between only European countries?] not reimposed. It is why Stormzy got the crowd to sing “Fuck Boris” during his headline set at Glastonbury in June, and why T-shirts emblazoned with the same slogan have been selling in huge numbers since.[Nothing commercial about this -- it's pure altruism]

Pots and kettles resume talks

Apparently, the Irish Government has been attacked in the popular press as incompetent and unwise in letting the Border be weaponised. Guardian support for all things Celtic and lack of awareness of the unintended consequences of endless moralising and lecturing has led to some sort of response:

The political fear is that this new breed of “Brexit Ultras” (Johnson’s cabinet with Nigel Farage’s Brexit party snapping at its heels) could deliberately pursue a no-deal EU exit at the expense of a volatile Irish peace.... Ireland, and the fragile peace process that has been built over the past 20 years, falls between [UK and EC positions]...That relations between London and Dublin are now strained is beyond dispute, though officials in Dublin insist that much of the noise is to be expected and aimed at a domestic UK audience rather than Ireland or the EU. [The problem is  Johnson insisting the removal of the backstop is a precondition for any deal, Varadkar adamant that the EU will not relent on the withdrawal agreement.

What seems to be a new Irish insight (in public at least) is the recognition at last that:

Nobody on the island [the writer of the piece is 'an award winning Irish journalist, author, broadcaster and motivational speaker'] is blind to the reality that in standing by the backstop in order to avoid a hard border, they could end up with one if the UK crashes out without a deal. Indeed, the Irish government has conceded, in its latest updated contingency action plan, that it will implement increased checks and procedures in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

So the options?

Last week Varadkar stated the obvious when he told the MacGill summer school that a hard Brexit would force communities in Northern Ireland to consider the possibility of a united Ireland. They already are. [But] the truth is that both communities in Northern Ireland – as well as citizens across the island of Ireland – are fearful of what a botched, rushed conversation about unification might yield. That fear is that the birth of a united Ireland would be accompanied by violence and upheaval....Unification without the support of unionists, whose traditions and identity must be protected as part of any shared future, cannot be pursued as a zero-sum game. Otherwise we risk repeating history: the Troubles in reverse.  [The first time this possibility has been acknowledged in the Grun to my knowledge]

So all the bluster, swagger and cosiness of the Irish/EC bonding has led to this after all?

Meanwhile, the Graun editorial is predictable:

There is no economic case for crashing out of the European Union. MPs must stop the government’s plans in their tracks 

But it explores a few ideological issues in a most amusing and un self-reflective way:

to the keenest leavers, Brexit has always been an article of belief rather a policy programme....In the end... a no-deal Brexit is an act of faith-based politics and not a rational choice.[And Remaining?]

The usual stuff on economic disaster is trotted out -- falling pound, lack of growth in investment, the Bank's prediction of a recession -- presumably as simple truths based entirely on rationality. There is a recognition that more 'political' scares have lost their force -- 'many like...[Johnson]... do not ultimately care about the Northern Ireland peace process, and are not bothered about the concerns of the devolved nations either.' Poor old Graun -- it embraces Unionism just as lots of people (especially in England) have developed compassion fatigue and posture cramp over the plight of the Celts and their romantic pursuits.

Finally, there is the usual misunderstanding of any sort of confrontational political tactics:

A rational policymaker would therefore be seeking ways of avoiding no-deal rather than feeding expectations that it will happen.  The Johnson government, though, has ramped up the rhetoric and pumped in another £2.1bn in public money, not least on its own propaganda...For a government to say it does not want something to happen because it would be so damaging and then to spend so much of its money and its political capital on the possibility that it will is a shameful strategy.

Ultimately, though, the Guardian takes a moral line. Politicians should just stop offering alternative arguments to Gruan tenets of faith:

Others [policies]  like the disgraceful relabelling of the Irish backstop as anti-democratic, when it is not, are lies designed to mislead the public.

Elsewhere, the Graun turns to freak show copy for the silly season:

Indian boy, seven, found with 526 teeth inside his mouth

Johnson is a WelshNat

M Kettle is still banging on and on, as he promised just after the Referendum, focused more on Johnson personally. The Gru has recently become a Unionist newspaper as we noted, [Actually not so for the editorial team who supported a no vote at the Scottish referendum in 2014, although some of their columnists fllirted with romantic ScotNattery]. This time it is the Welsh with whom we need to keep united. Kettle thinks:

The prime minister may end up doing more for Welsh independence than the nationalist hero Owain Glyndŵr

The nationalist hero who was defeated and killed in the 15th century he means?  Kettle sees the recent Johnson forays as:

... a prime ministerial grand tour around the country to show his new subjects who is boss....Tours like Johnson’s only emphasise that this union is increasingly divided – and perhaps even breaking apart...in many ways the most telling trip was Johnson’s foray into Wales...Modern Wales has endured little of the existential pain of Northern Ireland. The nationalist cause has never carved through Welsh politics the way it has in Scotland. Wales has been welded to England for far longer than the other nations. And its support for devolution was often lukewarm. [And it voted for Brexit, unthinkably for the Grudinad of course, but move on]...Yet amid the more eye-catching convulsions of Brexit elsewhere, the old idea that nothing is likely to change in the relationship between Wales and England is looking lazy.

Writing about Wales, almost as much as writing about Ireland, seems to encourage English romanticism:

The land, like the language, plays a dynamic role in nationalist consciousness. Angry farmers can make a leader suddenly vulnerable. [As confirmation]
Look what they and the “gilets jaunes” did to Emmanuel Macron. [Where do we start with this absurd leap of argument?]

Then the obligatory link to Kettle's obsession:

But this volatility is not simply about Johnson’s Marmite personality. Nor is it simply about the single-mindedness of the nationalist parties to exploit every situation for the separatist cause. It is also structurally bound up with Brexit itself, whatever the terms.

There might be some perilous deviation, post-Brexit, from wise EC rules:

What if Scotland chooses to subsidise its fishing fleets while England does not? What if Welsh hill-farmers secure a differential subsidy rate for their lamb that northern English hill-farmers cannot access? “The requirement for increased agreement across a whole range of new territory increases the scope for friction,” [The whole thing assumes nationalist independence and then trade wars]

Before we get too excited though, and before his colleagues question his objectivity:

It is important not to exaggerate, of course. There are many bridges to be crossed before Wales becomes as much of a threat to the union as Northern Ireland and Scotland now are. There are radical ways of heading off the disintegration of the United Kingdom, including the federalist new Act of Union proposed by Lord Lisvane ...Outright support for independence in Wales languishes in single figures. 

However, the Grun finds hope in ethnic identity and 'progressive' nationalism as ever, especially if it is cultural:

But more than one in three Welsh voters now feel some support for the idea, and the proportion of those whom nationalists dub the “indycurious” is clearly rising. Use of the Welsh language is growing and becoming more fashionable.[Unfortunately] Jeremy Corbyn refuses to engage on these identity issues.

Back to romanticism to end the piece:

the late and life-enhancing Welsh historian Gwyn Alf Williams wrote about the continuing potency of the legend of Owain Glyndŵr. ...“But since 1410 most Welsh people, at some time or another, if only in some secret corner of the mind, have been ‘out with Owain and his barefoot scrubs’. For the Welsh mind is still haunted by its lightning-flash vision of a people that was free.”

CeltNat good, EngNat bad, as ever. 'Wales' dreams of being free from Union with England -- but wants to stay in the EU? 

Meanwhile, the Grun continues to maintain the prestige and seriousness of British journalism it is so concerned about:

Does a local Lidl really bring down house prices?

NB -- the answer is no because lots of nice people now shop in Lidl too.