As the brexit crunch nears ...
It is not surprising that, as the date gets closer and closer when, unless parliament has agreed a Withdrawal Agreement with the European Union, article 50 will cause Britain to crash out without a deal, MPs who see that as a highly undesirable outcome are trying all sorts of measures to try to avoid it.
Whether you call it "no deal" or "World Trade Organisation" Brexit, this option was not seriously put forward as their preferred option by either of the main leave campaigns during the referendum, and to claim that there is any kind of mandate from the referendum which MPs who seek a softer form of Brexit are somehow betraying is utter insanity. If Leave campaigners had wanted a mandate not just for Brexit but for some particular form or Brexit they should have sought one instead of deliberately leaving the type of Brexit they wanted as vague as possible.
Hence I regard the attempts being made in some quarters to deselect MPs like Nick Boles for supporting particular forms of Brexit which those who are trying to oust them don't think "hard" enough as deeply reprehensible.
But make no mistake. There may not be a mandate for any particular form of Brexit, but there most certainly is a mandate to leave the EU, not just from the referendum but from the 2017 General Election in which the vast majority of MPs were elected on a manifesto promise to respect the result of the 2016 referendum.
I get the distinct impression that a large majority of both Leave and Remain voters are hugely frustrated with the logjam in parliament about Brexit. Most of the non-politicians I speak to do not have a strong opinion about the relative merits of WTO Brexit, the customs union, the Norway option, EEA Brexit, or the various other forms of hard and soft Brexit. But in this part of the world at least, even most remain voters just want MPs to agree a form of Brexit and get on with it.
That goes particularly for business, which hates nothing more than uncertainty. Most business people who I know strongly prefer the PM's deal to a "No Deal" Brexit but even more than that they want to know where they stand.
In my humble opinion it would be deeply damaging if MPs fail to agree on some form of Brexit in the next few weeks. Personally I think the PM's deal and any limitations on the backstop we can get is the best option on the table but I could live with a "Norway option" Brexit.
I would regard a "no deal" Brexit as a bad option, but no Brexit at all, with the consequent damage to our democracy, as worse.
Some MPs are trying to find a form of Brexit which can pass and I think they are doing the right thing. But others, whether they admit it to themselves are not, are putting forward proposals to delay or stop Brexit and I think this is most unwise.
I don't think it helps to criticise the integrity of MPs who have put forward amendments and motions which might have the effect of delaying or preventing Brexit or call another referendum, but I do think they are playing with fire for the reasons set out by Dan Hodges in his recent article
"I was a die-hard Remainer. But arrogant MPs have made me a hard Brexiteer."
Whether you call it "no deal" or "World Trade Organisation" Brexit, this option was not seriously put forward as their preferred option by either of the main leave campaigns during the referendum, and to claim that there is any kind of mandate from the referendum which MPs who seek a softer form of Brexit are somehow betraying is utter insanity. If Leave campaigners had wanted a mandate not just for Brexit but for some particular form or Brexit they should have sought one instead of deliberately leaving the type of Brexit they wanted as vague as possible.
Hence I regard the attempts being made in some quarters to deselect MPs like Nick Boles for supporting particular forms of Brexit which those who are trying to oust them don't think "hard" enough as deeply reprehensible.
But make no mistake. There may not be a mandate for any particular form of Brexit, but there most certainly is a mandate to leave the EU, not just from the referendum but from the 2017 General Election in which the vast majority of MPs were elected on a manifesto promise to respect the result of the 2016 referendum.
I get the distinct impression that a large majority of both Leave and Remain voters are hugely frustrated with the logjam in parliament about Brexit. Most of the non-politicians I speak to do not have a strong opinion about the relative merits of WTO Brexit, the customs union, the Norway option, EEA Brexit, or the various other forms of hard and soft Brexit. But in this part of the world at least, even most remain voters just want MPs to agree a form of Brexit and get on with it.
That goes particularly for business, which hates nothing more than uncertainty. Most business people who I know strongly prefer the PM's deal to a "No Deal" Brexit but even more than that they want to know where they stand.
In my humble opinion it would be deeply damaging if MPs fail to agree on some form of Brexit in the next few weeks. Personally I think the PM's deal and any limitations on the backstop we can get is the best option on the table but I could live with a "Norway option" Brexit.
I would regard a "no deal" Brexit as a bad option, but no Brexit at all, with the consequent damage to our democracy, as worse.
Some MPs are trying to find a form of Brexit which can pass and I think they are doing the right thing. But others, whether they admit it to themselves are not, are putting forward proposals to delay or stop Brexit and I think this is most unwise.
I don't think it helps to criticise the integrity of MPs who have put forward amendments and motions which might have the effect of delaying or preventing Brexit or call another referendum, but I do think they are playing with fire for the reasons set out by Dan Hodges in his recent article
"I was a die-hard Remainer. But arrogant MPs have made me a hard Brexiteer."
Comments
I really cannot see that either the present British government, nor any alternative likely to be in place in the immediate future is ever going to order the army to attack a peaceful demonstration with lethal force.