Unravelling the bluff and double-bluff of British Politics

Posted on 5 September 2019 by Pict1

To start the analysis at the end, last night about 1:30am I was sitting in my dressing gown with my first beer, ready for an all night session of cheering on philabusterers in the #HouseOflords reading tweets like this:


It was a most bizarre scene. A lot of people had obviously stayed up to follow the proceedings and to be quite frank almost no one knew what was going on. To give a flavour, they had been going at it hours, when I heard that they had finally finished going through amendments for the preamble. It was clear they could be talking about talking and those on twitter talking about talking about talking for days. I had no idea of the maths, but it looked like we could be watching for days and see the bill talked out.

Of course the main interest was reading tweets from the other mad people who were watching the most boring show on earth. I for example was adding my own:

Then at 1:30am something odd happened. The tortoise slow movement with the dull repetition of talking, “yes I will take the honorable Lord”, the strange archaic procedure to a division whereby one lot go via the bar and other the toilet (throne), and they file out and file in and then having moved as slowly as possible get to amendment 2g (after hours), suddenly changed and we got this:

Very soon we were being told:

Literally one minute we were all expecting to be there days, the next it was over and apparently the Tories, who appeared to be in an incredibly strong position, just caved in.

The labour position was that they had forced the government to cave in … but it was also patently clear that the government could have talked out the bill, so what did they get? There was clearly some deal and the speculation was quickly of an election. Turning to the Biased Corp, I found politicians waffling, but after a few minutes they were swapped by some “front bench” politicians (not that I recognised any). And immediately the interviewer went in to talk about an election. At first the labour front bench spokesman was talking about a hypothetical election after the bill was passed, but within minutes, the mask slipped and they started talking about “the election” which is coming. It was no longer a hypothetical, but clearly Labour had caved in to allow an election … and even more clearly, they were trying (and failing) to hide this.

The End Game

This shows that Labour and Tories had specific aims. The Tory aim was purely and simply to force an election on labour (they only needed labour). But it also shows that Labour were absolutely desperate to get this bill, which effectively blocks Brexit from going through. It was also clear labour were a remain party from the way Labour said they would campaign on the basis (long pause for breath) …

To go to the EU and get a deal, which they would then come back and put to the people in a referendum, where they would be campaigning to remain in the EU. (my words)

Quite obviously that is not a coherent or indeed thought out plan. It is not the plan of a single mind, but a hard fought compromise position. Because there was not the slightest point going to the EU to try to get a deal from the EU when the EU were being asked to negotiate with Labour who had no interest in a deal. That would be a total sham, the EU would just set the worst possible conditions it could, which would make a deal impossible and labour would just accept them. So, the “go for a deal” was just pure bluff by labour. A thin PR coating to the real aim. The we’re “going for a deal” was quite clearly a position they wanted the public to believe they held … and the reason is simple: large numbers of labour voters are leave supporters (perhaps a majority).

This explains why Labour were so desperate to get the bill to stop a “no deal”, because a no deal was a way to force the EU to provide an acceptable deal, and an acceptable deal was a way for the Tories to deliver brexit. So, Labour was intent on stopping brexit, but because too many of their supporters wanted brexit, they were trying to pretend that the reason they stopped brexit was not that they were going back on their manifesto promise, but that Brexit MPs couldn’t accept the EU terms.

How do I know that labour were desperate to stop a no deal in order to hide the fact they were against Brexit. For a start, the way Labour and other remainer MPs went absolutely nuts about the prospect of a no-deal, when any reasonable person could see that with the EU trading on WTO terms with half the top 10 trading nations. It was no problem at all for the UK to trade on WTO terms. However, there was possibly other explanations. Rather than blocking brexit, Labour might have been against leaving the common market … or there was there something that had to be given up with a no deal that was pretty sacrosanct to Labour.

The problem with those, is that Labour has never cared much about what happens to business, and if there had been something sacrosanct that had to be given up, surely we’d have heard about it in the three plus years we’ve been talking about it? And it was specifically Labour … not just nebulous “remainer MPs” that had the problem with allowing a no deal, because Labour were clearly the ones the Tories needed to get an election, and it was them that were desperate to get the block on a no-deal, despite the obvious logic, that a no deal made negotiations impossible. Labour were who the Tories had to do the deal with, so Labour were clearly intent on getting the “no deal” blocking bill, and there is absolutely no credible reason labour would want that except to block brexit.

Even Labour MPs would understand that if I walk into a second hand car room and say “I’ve got to buy a car from you today, and I’m looking for a discount on your prices”. The response will be “the only car we have available today is this most expensive one, and we can’t negotiate the price”. The no-deal blocker was intended to allow the EU to force the worst possible deal on Brexit, and the worst possible deal was one that was impossible to accept and would stop us leaving.

Anyone serious about Brexit, but perhaps concerned about details of the negotiations, would have had no problem in giving the UK negotiators the leverage to walk away. It is therefore absolutely clear that Labour’s actual position has always been to block us leaving and that the no-deal blocking bill was just a way to stop the UK leaving the EU.

Unravelling the Tory Moves

Whether you agree or not that Labour was intent to use the no-deal blocking bill to derail leaving the EU, the facts are clear that labour were desperate to get the bill and traded that with Boris for an election (which no sane person thinks they can win).

Boris wanted an election … that was his end game. But why didn’t he just ask for one? Labour had been demanding an election repeated for ages. As the video in this tweet shows:


It therefore seems that the Tories calculated that if, like Theresa May, they were seen to demand an election, that they would be penalised. So, the Tories clearly wanted to “find themselves” in a position whereby they were forced by others (through no fault of their own) to go for an election.

The other problem for the Tories, is that whilst they had a paper majority, in reality on their main policy of Brexit, they were very much a minority government. The Tories needed to get a workable majority, that meant either getting rid of remainers from their ranks, or going to an election and getting a much higher majority, or both.

So, Boris needed a “show down” in the commons whereby he would force Labour and his own rebels to vote against him, thereby showing he was forced to ask for an election by the rebels and Labour. So, all those people who would have their TV filled with political squabbling for weeks on end, would be blaming labour and the rebels and not the Tories.

What happened (on the surface) is that Labour planned with the SNP and Lib Dems to block Brexit by passing a “no deal blocking” bill. And that Tories reacted to stop this bill by proroguing parliament. Both remainers and Tories were trying to give the appearance they were simply responding to the other. Remainers, that they were responding to the New PM who was set on allowing us to leave without a deal (In retrospect May as a remainer had been intent on using the lack of a deal as a way of blocking us leaving …. trying very hard, but “sorry old chap, it couldn’t be done”). Tories were giving the impression that they were responding to the sudden move to pass a no-deal blocker.

However, that is absolutely crap.

The parliament passed a bill saying we would leave, deal or no deal a long time ago, and labour signed up to that. So, if no deal had been a red line for Labour, why did they agree to that bill? I can’t think of any deal they had made to sign allowing the “no deal”, so clearly that was just PR for their brexit supporters. They wanted to give the appearance of being for Brexit, but their intention was to let the EU block the deal and then let the Tories get the blame for the failed negotiations … and if that failed as a last measure, they clearly had an overwhelming majority of remainers in the commons and could easily pass a no-deal blocker bill at the last minute.

And, it now seems clear that Boris knew that as well (presumably they had understood the position through the gossip in the bars).

If Labour always intended blocking brexit with the no-deal blocker bill, why  in the three years of discussing Brexit didn’t they just bring it forward … particularly when “no deal” was clearly being discussed seriously long ago. The reason is clear: if Labour had moved to block a no-deal, the Tories would then have moved to go for an election which they would clearly win. Labour couldn’t move too early, Labour needed to wait until the very last minute, so that there was no time for the Tories to go for an election. That would thwart the Tories in their main promise of getting Brexit, and it would give the Labour the “excuse” of stopping a no-deal. Labour were clearly relying on that as a way to both stop brexit without getting tarred with the brush of being anti-brexit and losing its brexit supporting voters.

“It wasne me gov … twas that other guy who stopped Brexit by insisting on no deal”.

So, how did Boris use this to his own advantage? Labour had planned to use its massive remainer majority to get a no-deal blocker bill through at the last minute. It had clearly worked out the timetable, such that under the fixed term election act, there was no possibility of Tories going for an election after they passed the Brexit blocker act.

So, the Tories waited until the last minute, and then threw a spanner in the works, by calling a new session of parliament. It’s absolutely patently clear that this was a disaster for labour and all the remain parties given the way they tried every possible desperate measure, going to courts in Ireland and Scotland, to stop it. Because, why would it normally matter that they had lost 4 or 5 days when they were swanning off for weeks at party conferences? Why after three years of time when they could have passed the Brexit blocker bill, didn’t they go for it earlier and make sure it couldn’t be blocked?

It was because time was of the essence!

The remainers must have calculated very precisely how long it would take to get their brexit blocking bill through, in such a way that Boris then had no opportunity to go for an election. Presumably they had only 4 days spare time. So, Boris opted to start a new session and gave himself enough leeway to remove those days and kill the bill unless it was pushed through with extra-ordinary and unconstitutional speed.

That, is why the speaker of parliament, who is supposed to be impartial, broke the rules of the house to authorise an emergency debate to push through a bill that could have been passed anytime in the last years. Did Boris actually want to stop the bill? In retrospect, it seems he didn’t really mind if it went through, because all along, what he’s been wanting is an election, in time to get a working majority to pass Brexit before the 31st October.

Indeed, it’s not clear whether Boris cares whether there is a delay … it might even have been part of his game plan. For now we are hearing rumours that the EU will not allow a delay to Brexit. The EU clearly sees that if Boris got his election and majority, then any delay to the proceedings would just give Boris more time to force them to negotiate an acceptable leaving deal – or leave without a deal.

Double Bluff

I can’t help thinking that Boris actually stoked up the fire about “proroguing” parliament in order to force the remainers to take action in a very reckless way. Because, we were hearing all kinds of rumours about totally shutting down parliament. And then we got all kinds of stupid demos about a “coup”. Boris was doing nothing I can see to calm the waters before the shit hit the fan. Yes, once they “prorogued parliament”, it was portrayed as it was as just a matter of fact normal procedure that happens almost every year. In the end, the time taken out the parliamentary timetable was miniscule compared to the three years Brexit has been discussed. So, why did the Tories let it work up to such hysterical proportions?

It may come down to something very simple: that they were trying to make pushing through this Brexit stopping bill something that Labour could not refuse to do. Boris, was trying to ensure that without the Bill, Labour would be so damaged in the eyes of its remainer supporters that it could never win an election. Thus, by making the Brexit blocking bill into a critical issue for labour supporters, it forced labour to trade a new election for the bill.

Who wins?

Trying to say who won, when the game is not over is difficult. Because whilst the Tories forced labour to accept their “brexit blocker” for the election deal, they ousted those splitting the Tory part, they forced Labour to come clean as a Remain party and they revealed Bercow to be a contemptuous politicking remain bastard, Labour hasn’t yet delivered the vote to get the election, and there are enough “rebels” in Labour, that it could get a convenient “rebellion” when it tries to back Boris’ election bid. That could push the election over the timeline that is convenient for negotiating with the EU.

However, that would be an extremely dangerous move for Labour, because it would again show they are split, can’t control their own party. And given Labour needs those Labour supporters who voted to leave, to vote Labour, it would almost destroy Labour at the next election. Almost certainly if they delay the election, when it comes labour will come in behind the Lib Dems.

There is however the possibility of some procedural move. I have no idea what could throw a spanner in Boris’ timetable, but now that the anti-democrats have got control of the timetable, perhaps they will trigger something to delay the election.

But, both Labour and Tories know that the country is getting ever more sick and tired of the delays around Brexit. So, neither side will want to get tarred with causing a further delay.

My best guess, is that Labour and the other remainers didn’t have a plan for a situation where they got the brexit blocking bill but Boris got his election in time to return with a majority before the final EU negotiations. My belief is that the remainers are a bunch of ill-fitting companions whose only plan was to get the brexit blocking bill, and they hadn’t thought anything about the election. In contrast, I’ve no doubt the Tories are very much prepared to run a very quick election.

So, I think Labour & the other remainers got what they agreed was their aim, but I don’t think in retrospect this would have been their aim if they had worked out what the Tories ultimate goal had been. Instead, the most damaging threat to Labour and the other remainers, wasn’t not blocking the no-deal, but the Tories getting a big majority which could nullify any remaining remainers in the party.

But having gone full nutter over stopping the block of the  brexit blocking bill, how can labour and the other remainers now do a 180 turn and stoke up the rhetoric to stop Boris going for a democratic election (which they’ve been demanding he do). “The most important thing in the world is to stop Boris blocking the brexit blocking bill” …. to ….  “The most important thing is to stop Boris getting an election” … in a matter of  few days.

The gullible massed students outside stoked up to “stop the coup”, are not going to suddenly understand why they’ve got to now stop the democracy which they were just marching to “defend”. It will take weeks to reprogram the brainwashed kids to start believing that an election is the end of the world …which is not long enough to stop the election from happening.

Boris’ real plan

Of course, Boris’ actual view on brexit is debatable. Given how he’s played the remainers, he is also quite capable of playing everyone else to make us believe he wants Brexit. So, all we know for certain, is that he wants power, and that he, and us brexiteers just happen to share the railtracks for the meanwhile. But could Boris have a plan to wreck Brexit? He needs us Brexiteers to give him a majority in parliament. So, he needs the lure of getting Brexit to suck us brexiteers in to support him.

But will he actually deliver brexit?

That is really hard to judge. He clearly gave away the brexit blocking bill to labour to get the election. He wants the election before the supposed leaving date … ostensibly to push Brexit through. But, if he is given 5 years with an enormous mandate, will he actually deliver Brexit, or will he not?

Let us suppose that Boris is a remainer. This supposes that his plan when supporting Brexit was to be seen as the figurehead, but to fail to deliver. He would then be a loser and that doesn’t do anyone bidding for power any good. Now having been part of the campaign, I know it was a total mess on the inside, so it might have been intended to fail. But the chaos inside can be easily explained by the relative novices involved (like me). Otherwise, there was no detectable lack of enthusiasm by Boris… but if he wanted to use the Brexit campaign, why would there be any?

Clearly, the reason he got elected Tory leader was also because he supported Brexit. So a shrewd move on his part, but not necessarily any indication he supports Brexit. Clearly he gets support from people close to him who support Brexit, so again no indication that they are aware of any wavering in the support for Brexit.

The problem with Boris is that he is too good. Corbyn couldn’t pretend to father Xmas to five year olds without being found out. In contrast, Boris’ image has been carefully constructed and his politics carefully tuned to get him elected. And perhaps that is our Brexiteer salvation, because Boris is interested in power he will do whatever it takes to keep power, and what it takes is to support Brexit. Like the queen … we let him live with the trappings of power, but only as long as he does what we the public want does he stay in power. And that has always been the British way.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.