The Easter Brexit Agreement ?

I listened carefully to all the answers which the Prime Minister Teresa May gave in the House of Commons on Thursday afternoon April 11^th 2019, as I have done on every previous Brexit reporting occasion and noted the significant differences which augur well in her dedicated effort to respect the binding undertaken given to the British people in the  June 23^rd Brexit 2016 referendum. An undertaking which was also given by the Labour Party and which was also followed by both political parties in their 2017 General Election manifesto’s. As  I commented to a journalist three years ago when attending the presentation by the Shadow Chancellor when he outlined Labour’s investment bank  proposals at the Glass Centre in Sunderland, I anticipated that although our political relationship with Western Europe would change, ways would be found to retain all the elements which had served everyone well over the past forty years.

My confidence and my optimism is because I believe I recognise the fundamental shift in the approach of the Prime Minister as she appears to have decided that she has nothing to lose by persisting in what she believes is right for the for future of the British Nation and damn the personal consequences.

In this respect she has become more like Jeremey Corbyn, the official leader of the Opposition and leader of the Labour Party, that she would ever admit, in public. She still finds it difficult to control her feelings towards those in her own party who are determined to bring her down because she refuses to yield to their view of Britain’s political and economic future. She showed contempt towards Sir William Cash and other member of the far right in her party and is taking on the U.D.P. 

Having leaked the 27 page statement  the Cabinet Secretary  briefed on  why no deal would be bad for the British economy and the public welfare, the memorandum from the head of the Civil Services telling all government departments to stand down No deal preparations was also leaked further incensing the Brexit Right and in so doing challenges Cabinet Members Leadsom, Gove, Mordaunt and the other members of the Pizza Club, to shut up or resign. They know that if they resign, they will be replaced by those who support the approach of the Prime Minister and not by other Brexiteers. Mrs May knows that the rest of the Cabinet will not resign and bring down the government fearing the consequences of a General Election.

The remaining threat to her immediate position as Prime Minister is that the U.D.P are arguing that their binding agreement to support the government in any vote of confidence applies only to the previously agreed length of the present Parliament session which commenced on 21^st June 2017 and is therefore due to end in June. This in part is why Mrs May attempted to extend Article 50 only to June. However, the present session of two years instead of the normal one is because of Brexit and the Right in her party immediately understood that the new flexible Article 50 extension will result in in the extension of Parliamentary session, with the UDP immediately saying the Supply and Confidence agreement will have to be renegotiated. It would be surprising if the Prime Minister has not checked that the agreement continues for the length of the session without the length being determined. The UDP also know that Jeremey Corbyn has no intention of calling for a new vote of confidence in the Government while he is in negotiation for a Brexit confidence agreement which will guarantee his party’s support for passing the Withdrawal agreement and for a revised political agreement on future relationships with Europe. As with the UDP agreement Labour could insist on other strings

It is not evident if the media is deliberately not explaining to the public the potential legally binding nature of any agreement or there is ignorance. It is important to appreciate that as with the agreement reached with the Liberal Democrats which formed the Coalition in 2010 and that with the UPD in 2017,  the discussions with Labour are of a similar order, and are being formally serviced by the Civil Service and its lawyers and will have the same force as any international treaty between two or more countries, and where the Prime Minister has  the power to enter into with the authority of the head of state using the royal prerogative. I assume the head of state formally sanctioned the Good Friday agreement, the Coalition and UDP agreements and would do so any between May and Corbyn.

This  also explains the anger of the SNP and other minority parties in Parliament to May’s decision to try and do a deal with Labour which will in effect replace that with the DUP. In this they are joined by the pure Remainers and anti-Corbyn members of the  Parliamentary Labour Party who appreciate that the 2017 Labour Election Manifesto and the 2018 annual conference resolution only commit the Party to a second referendum, a confirmatory vote , or to seeking a general election if their six tests are not met, and that on behalf of the Labour Party, Corbyn and Keir Starmer and other members of the negotiation team have made public their willingness to compromise, stating that so far the Prime Minister has not ab acceptable compromise on the table.  It is assumed that these talks will continue with added momentum during the next two weeks while the backbench members of the Commons have been sent back to face their constituencies and some of the media spotlight is defused. Obviously, some of the most outspoken have sorted out their position with their constituencies, but there will be others who the Prime Minister and the Tory Whips believe will accept the urgent need to get the Withdrawal agreement passed before May 22^nd and preferable before May 2^nd.  The momentum to get it done at any price now has full steam.

It was also evident from Mrs May’s answers to questions yesterday, that the priority, one which is also shared in part with Corbyn, is that they want to avoid participation in the EEC Elections on 22^nd of May.  There are two reasons for this. The first is that Polls, as they do for the local elections on May 2^nd are looking very bad for the Conservative Party, and also not good for Labour is some of the Leave seats where racism was the main factor in the referendum result. The second is the anticipated rise not just of the two Brexit parties, UKIP and the new party of Nigel Farage but of other far right parties. Much will depend if UKIP and the Brexit Party can do a deal not to both contest some seats or if the anti-Tory and Labour vote is split.  The timing of any formal agreement between Labour and the Government will therefore be crucial.

The media also did not appear to appreciate that the proposal to put options to the House of Commons which the government would be bound by the outcome, was only a back stop if agreement is not reached with the Labour Party, and then only if Corbyn also agrees for Labour to be bound by the outcome. May on behalf of a future Conservative government and Corbyn also, do not want to give more power to the present composition of the House of Commons than Speaker Bercow has allowed so far.

The preference of both leaders is for a general election rather than a People’s Vote as the Prime Minister knows that she could use a General Election not just to confront Corbyn for a second time, but believes that the work undertaken to discredit Corbyn as a security threat and  anti-Semitism has damaged him personally and that unlike  her previous attempt  to make the general election about Brexit, any new snap election will become Brexit dominated by the media, however hard the Opposition leader attempts to focus on the impact of austerity, climate change and the inherent inequalities of  the British economy and power structure.  Corbyn also knows that he needs the opportunity of a General Election to rid the House of Commons of some of his fiercest critics. Now that Commons have been given the taste of power against the executive they will want to exercise again and only a new more traditional Speaker  following a General Election will change that, and I still anticipate that Jacob Reece Mogg is the most likely candidate with Andrea Leadsom the other possibility as there will be  across party pressure for the officer to  again be held by a woman with Baroness Betty Boothroyd the only other woman to be elected.

The difficulty Labour has is in signing any agreement without a commitment to a Peoples Vote, and if this proves to be an obstacle the solution is a vote of no confidence leading to a general election, but as has been stated, the Tory right will not support unless there is a way to replace May and the UDP is legally bound to support.

My cause for optimism is that this all points to May immediately putting formally on the table a form of Customs Union and common  market conformity regularity which Corbyn and his front bench could sign up to with confidence knowing  he would have sufficient support from the shadow government and supporters to get the consequential Brexit legislation through the British Parliament, despite opposition from the hard right and the hard Remainers together with the SNP and Lib Dems who know that any deal will damage their future electoral prospects and that of UKIP and the Brexit Party.

Both leaders know that if a deal is to be done and prove successful it has to be done quickly and the two week recess provides a great opportunity for what future generations will call the Easter agreement