Welcome back to Blog 16 of my Weekly Digest! My round up of this week’s politics news in NI, UK and the USA. You know the drill by now, I don’t cover absolutely everything, just whatever grabs my attention on any given week. And there was a lot to attract my gaze this past week, that’s for sure! Once again, I think the biggest story of several this week is still the Brexit trade negotiations. Hence, I have entitled this week’s blog – Brexit, Betrayal and Brinkmanship, for reasons which will become obvious! As always, we begin right here in N. Ireland.
It is in N Ireland where the Brexit betrayal is being felt most acutely. Specifically, within the ranks of the DUP, who have found themselves floundering all week under a wave of criticism over their strategic errors around Brexit and their misplaced trust in Boris and the ERG wing of the Tory Party. It was the DUP, let’s not forget, who campaigned most vociferously for a hard Brexit. It was the DUP who controversially received the largest ever recorded anonymous financial donation during the final days of the Brexit Referendum campaign, and duly spent it on full page, pro-Brexit adverts in London newspapers! It was the DUP who invited Boris Johnson to their conference and fawned over his every word, as he gave cast iron assurances that NI would not be treated differently post-Brexit. It was also the DUP who rejected the softer Brexit offered by Teresa May and stayed loyal to the hard Brexiteers in Parliament at every turn.
And yet, here we are! NI will indeed be treated differently, from January 1st, as the Brexit transition period comes to an end. Whether or not the UK and EU secure a last minute trade deal, there will be a customs border down the Irish Sea regardless! Fears of substantial extra costs and delays for goods coming to and from GB to NI have subsided somewhat, given the agreement this week on the removal of the highly controversial NI Protocol, but this doesn’t change the fact that an Irish Sea border will come into effect and will be here to stay. It was always going to be thus! So, it does beg the inevitable question; why did the DUP not see this coming? The fact that the DUP’s Agriculture & Rural Development Minister, Edwin Poots, has had to oversee his department officials installing the new border infrastructure at our sea ports, has only served to rub more ironic salt into the gaping wounds!
The big beasts of the DUP, including Lord Dodds, Jeffrey Donaldson and Arlene Foster, came out fighting this week, on the tv and the airwaves, denying that they’d made a huge strategic error in backing Brexit so enthusiastically, they rebuffed all suggestions that they were enthralled to Boris and his right wing ERG cabal and that they have now been hoodwinked, and have dismissed the notion that they have weakened the very thing which is their raison d’etre – the union! By anyone’s standards that is a staggering level of denial and delusion which is simply not credible! There must be some serious regrets and recriminations going on internally within the DUP, surely? There must also be a tacit admission that NI PLC could even do quite well out this arrangement in the medium to long term, particularly if there is a no deal exit, as seems increasingly likely! We could be handed the golden egg of being uniquely positioned with one foot in each camp, with fairly open access to both the UK and EU markets! The only caveat, and it’s a big one for the DUP and Unionism, is that we may increasingly pivot towards the ROI and the EU, economically speaking. The political and constitutional pivot may also seem a more distinct possibility as a result! The DUP may even be grateful, eventually, for the principle of consent assurances granted under the previously maligned Good Friday Agreement! It will also be interesting to see what impact all of this has on DUP support at the next election, or if there are to be any repercussions for the current leadership!
The other story which caught my critical eye in NI this week was on the education front. There was a very feisty meeting of the Education Committee at Stormont, with DUP Minister, Peter Weir, coming under intense scrutiny, mainly from the SDLP’s Daniel Wray McCrossan and Committee Chair, Chris Lyttle (Alliance). The main focus of their combined ire was in relation to the Minister’s refusal to countenance the early closure of schools before Christmas, despite a rising tide of positive cases in young people and the very real possibility of many pupils and teachers having to isolate over Christmas as a result. The other point of contention was regarding the Minister’s refusal to even contemplate an alternative to running GCSE and A level exams as normal in May and June.
The arguments for scrapping the exam series in 2021 are well laid out – pupils have seen significant disruption in the delivery of their courses of study, due to the initial Covid lockdown, extended half-term holiday and then there’s the many sporadic examples of pupils and/or teachers having to self-isolate for 14 days at a time. The fact that some schools/areas have been affected more than others arguably creates an uneven playing field where exams are concerned. Mr Weir refutes this analysis and believes that exams are still the fairest way to award grades for the current cohort. He described Wray McCrossan’s criticisms as a ‘diatribe’ and dismissed his call for the Minister to apologise to pupils and their parents for his constant refusal to listen to them on these issues! It was probably just as well that Mr Weir was attending via Zoom from the Department of Education HQ rather than in person!
Boris Johnson suffered another run of defeats in the House of Lords this week, after peers backed a move to protect the NHS in a trade deal. The new law would ban any trade deal that “undermined” the NHS’s ability to provide free services or control drug prices. That was just one of several defeats inflicted on the PM over amendments to the Trade Bill. Peers also voted to block trade deals with any country that commits genocide or violates human rights, and demanded a bigger say for Parliament over the details of any deal after Brexit. However, this could lead to a kickback in the House of Commons – after Tory ministers vowed to oppose the amendment on protecting the NHS, claiming that protections already exist! The problem is, the majority of the Lords simply don’t trust them!
Meanwhile, that Priti Patel bullying issue hasn’t gone away, you know! Boris Johnson is facing an unprecedented legal challenge over his decision to effectively exonerate Priti Patel of bullying her department officials. Lawyers acting on behalf of senior civil servants issued a pre-action notice to Downing Street this week accusing the Prime Minister of acting unlawfully by overruling the findings of his own independent adviser and clearing the Home Secretary of misconduct. The notice is the first step towards a Judicial Review of the PM’s decision, and states that if it were allowed to stand it would set a “damaging precedent” that would exempt ministers from being bound by normal employment practices.
If the challenge succeeds Mr Johnson’s decision could ultimately be overturned, which would have far reaching implications for ministerial accountability. The government could also be forced to make the Cabinet Office investigation into Ms Patel’s behaviour public! This could all get very embarrassing indeed!
And so to those Brexit trade deal negotiations! This is turning out to be quite the saga! Mr Johnson struck a defiant tone at Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, as he prepared to make an eleventh hour dash to Brussels for dinner with EU Commission President, Ursula von der Leyen later that evening. As the threat of a no-deal scenario loomed large, Mr Johnson insisted a deal was “there to be done”. However, he told MPs: “Our friends in the EU are currently insisting that if they pass a new law in the future with which we in this country do not comply or don’t follow suit, then they want the automatic right to punish us and to retaliate…. Secondly, they are saying that the UK should be the only country in the world not to have sovereign control over its fishing waters… I don’t believe that those are terms that any Prime Minister of this country should accept.” Leader of the opposition, Sir Keir Starmer, said the British public would “pay the price” for a no-deal scenario and laid the blame squarely at the Prime Minister for a “total failure” of leadership.
Well, that was Wednesday! It seems the dinner schmooze with Ursula didn’t do the trick and the evening ended with little/no progress being made on the outstanding issues! Perhaps Boris was too preoccupied with the fine dining on offer to pay much attention?
Then, at a summit of EU leaders on Thursday, Mrs von der Leyen said: “I had a very long conversation yesterday night with Prime Minister Boris Johnson. It was a good conversation but it is difficult. We are willing to grant access to the single market to our British friends – it is the largest single market in the world. But the conditions have to be fair. They have to be fair for our workers and for our companies, and this fine balance of fairness has not been achieved so far.”
In response to the EU’s proposals, Downing Street again stressed the importance of taking back control of the UK’s waters. Mr Johnson said: “I’ve just updated Cabinet on where we’ve got to with our friends and partners in the EU and they agreed very strongly with me that the deal on the table is really not at the moment right for the UK.
So, into the weekend we went, still without a deal, or any prospect of one it seemed! In the meantime, contingency plans were being hurriedly announced for the event of a No Deal scenario. The EU put agreements in place to ensure air travel would not be disrupted, for example. Boris Johnson, meanwhile, deployed the Royal Navy! What?! The Royal Navy? Are we really gearing up for the Battle of Trafalgar 2.0? What is going on? No, you didn’t misread that, the navy have indeed deployed an additional 4 gunboats to add to the existing 4 to patrol British fishing waters! I kid you not! This was, literally, a crass act of gunboat diplomacy, designed to play up to the pro-Brexit gallery and make Johnson look like the tough guy! Very tough, yes, deploying warships against a few French trawler men! If this was designed to project British power and intimidate the EU, it will have laughably failed and will have been entirely counterproductive! Not so much brinkmanship, and more a sinking ship, which smacks of desperation! Luckily, the EU were dismissive rather than angry at the clumsy intimidation tactics.
And so to the current state of play? In a joint statement on Sunday, Boris Johnson and European Commission chief, Ursula von der Leyen said it was “responsible at this point to go the extra mile”. The leaders agreed to tell negotiators to carry on talks in Brussels “to see whether an agreement can even at this late stage be reached”. They did not say how long these latest talks would continue, but the final, final, final deadline is 31st December, and time must be allowed for the UK and European Parliaments to vote on any deal that emerges before then. It must be said, though, that the prospects still remain slim at best, but where there’s a will there’s a way!
The other consideration in all of this, of course, is what will the Labour Party do, both in the event of no deal or if the impossible happens and a deal is presented to the Commons to be voted on?
Keir Starmer must be weighing up what could be the biggest judgement call of his leadership. If there is a deal, the Labour leader has to decide whether to vote against the agreement, vote for it, or abstain. In this instance is a bad deal better than no deal? If he votes for the deal then Labour bears some ownership for what occurs next. If Starmer’s priority is to prevent further Brexit divisions within an already fractured Labour Party then you can see the attraction of abstaining. If he votes against he will be initially derided as the perennial Remainer but, if things go badly in post-Brexit Britain with no sunlit uplands to be had, he at least can claim it was not his fault or responsibility. Interestingly, when challenged by Johnson at PMQ’s, Starmer said Labour would act in the national interest. All I know is, I’m glad I don’t have to make that call!
Right, let’s leave those choppy, contested seas around the UK behind and head for calmer waters in the USA, shall we?Calmer waters? I’m afraid not! That may have been wishful thinking on my part! It has all been kicking off stateside this week, yet again, as the post-election fallout just keeps on rolling!
In what appeared to be a last ditch, desperate attempt to have the US Election result overturned, a legal bid was lodged at the Supreme Court by the State of Texas, backed by several other pro-Trump state Attorneys General. They seemed overly keen to please the President’s supporters, and submitted an amicus brief in support of Texas, undeterred by the reality that Trump has lost the election in multiple recounts and lawsuits already.
The elections lawsuit, backed enthusiastically by President Donald Trump and quickly dismissed by the US Supreme Court, was filled with claims that failed to withstand basic scrutiny. The high court, therefore, threw out the complaint filed by Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton that directly attacked four other states where President-elect Joe Biden won: Georgia, Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin. Widely predicted to fail by legal experts, the lawsuit still drew the support of 18 Republican attorneys general and, fascinatingly, 126 Republican members of Congress, including House Republican leader Kevin McCarthy. Texas, Trump and his other allies argued that the high court should set aside all four states’ votes, allowing Republican-led state legislatures to swing the election to the president. That would have been unprecedented in US history. Needless to say, Trump’s response to his latest legal setback via his Twitter account was predictably incandescent!
Fascinatingly, this particular row may not end here, as Rep. Bill Pascrell (D-N.J.) on Friday urged House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to refuse to seat any of the 126 Reuplican members who signed the Amicus Brief supporting the Texas lawsuit aimed at overturning the presidential election. Pascrell, who has been among the most vocal proponents in Congress of investigations into the Trump administration, called on Pelosi to “exclude” any members who signed the brief, claiming they want to “tear the United States government apart.” Pascrell cites Section 3 of the 14th amendment – which states that anyone who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” cannot serve in federal office – claiming the lawsuit seeks to “obliterate public confidence in our democratic system” and that those who signed it committed “unbecoming acts that reflect poorly on our chamber.”
Pelosi herself has signalled firm opposition to the Trump-backed effort, calling it “an act of flailing GOP desperation, which violates the principles enshrined in our American Democracy” in an open letter to Democratic colleagues. “Republicans are subverting the Constitution by their reckless and fruitless assault on our democracy,” Pelosi added in the letter, which was released after Pascrell’s, though she did not say whether she would heed his calls. This is thought to be unlikely, but such is the level of rancour in the air at present you simply couldn’t rule it out! Watch this space!
Well, that’s your lot for another week, folks! I hope you’ve enjoyed reading another instalment of the Weekly Digest. Feel free to share! Hopefully, by the time I file my next update, there will be some more clarity around the post-Brexit trading arrangements at the very least! Until then, stay tuned in, stay informed and stay safe out there! Au revoir!
Fergal McGuckin, Head of Politics, Lagan College, Belfast
The Weekly Politics Digest! 