No. 89 - Who are you kidding, James?
Dear James,
Who are you kidding? Three days to scrutinize a Bill that will change everything for a generation? You must think we are all naive! It is quite obvious that this attempt to limit debate on Boris’s Bill is the act of a desperate man. A man (or should I say two men – Boris and Dominic?) who will break every principle, betray every loyalty and trash every tradition to get their way. At one point he even tried to break the law. Fortunately we still have in our country a Supreme Court and since their recent judgment Boris has – resentfully – followed the law of the land. Nevertheless, while such deplorable traits were originally restricted to his private life as lothario and journalist, today they have segued seamlessly into Tory party public policy. I am afraid James, that Boris is a scoundrel and, by default, your party would seem to have become a party of scoundrels too.
Things are certainly moving at a fast pace. Yesterday, John Bercow made a statesmanlike announcement to the House, describing Boris Johnson’s second attempt to force the Commons over the line on Brexit as ‘repetitive and disorderly’. According to Erskine May the substance of yesterday’s Government motion to run Saturday’s Bill again was not permitted. Yesterday evening the government published its Withdrawal Agreement Bill for the first time. One hundred and ten pages of a bill that would dramatically change the UK’s economy for decades to come. And the Commons has only three days to scrutinize it! Is this the way to run a nation?
One of the main differences in Boris’s deal compared with Theresa’s seems to be the question of Northern Ireland. Putting aside your party’s recent constitutional betrayal of the DUP, this alone would surely require a deep and thorough analysis of the economic and administrative impact of this initial partial dismemberment of the UK? Yesterday the Brexit Minister, Stephen Barclay, after claiming that trade between NI and GB would be frictionless, had to admit that NI businesses would have to fill out exit declarations. Even your own ministers do not seem to understand the new Boris ‘deal’!
But it gets worse. The central principles of government of this country for hundreds of years has been ministerial responsibility and honesty before the facts. Today, not only do we have a Prime Minister who understands neither of those tenets, but we also have a Chancellor - the economic anchor of any government - abandoning any semblance of competence or responsibility in this austere role. Yesterday Sajid Javid, rejecting demands for the Treasury to carry out a thorough economic assessment of the government’s Brexit deal, claimed that the deal is “self-evidently in our economic interest” because ending Brexit uncertainty would in itself be beneficial to the economy. That’s a bit like someone who has just thrown himself out of a burning plane without a parachute, saying, ‘Phew! That was a lucky escape!’. Independent analysis by the think tank, UK in a Changing Europe, has suggested that Boris’s plan would knock between 2.3% to 7% off GDP over the next decade, compared with remaining in the EU. The equivalent estimates for Theresa May’s deal were 1.9% to 5.5%.
So today the Commons will vote on the government's "programme motion", which provides a timetable for the legislation's passage through the Commons and limits the length of the debates to three days. Again, the government is up to its old tricks. Even the ‘Father of the House’, your veteran Conservative Ken Clarke said: “Unless you are prepared to contemplate more expansive debate, there is not the slightest possibility of considering the deal that has been obtained within the time available.” Even someone who voted for Theresa May’s Brexit deal three times, the independent unionist MP Sylvia Hermon, said: “I would very much like the prime minister to come to Northern Ireland to explain in detail to the people why they only deserve three days’ consideration of the major changes to them and how this bill will affect their futures.”
I come back to my original question James. Who are you kidding?
I think the only answer must be, 'Yourself’!
Kind regards,
BH - Your Concerned Constituent.