Brexit. Why do Brits want Out of the EU?

Downing Street has cancelled all leave for government advisers in the run up to Britain’s withdrawal from the EU on 31 October.

Boris Johnson’s chief strategic adviser Sir Edward Lister emailed all special advisers today informing them that no holidays should be booked until the end of October.

The move is likely to fuel speculation that ministers are preparing the ground for a general election after MPs return to Westminster in September.

There is "a lot of uncertainty" about the UK's capacity to patrol fishing waters after a no-deal Brexit, a memo from a government department mistakenly emailed to the BBC says.

The note says there are just 12 ships "to monitor a space three times the size of the surface area of the UK".

The memo from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs was discussing media stories.

But ministers said they are confident security will be enforced after Brexit.

The UK is due to leave the EU on 31 October. A "divorce" deal - which sets out how the UK leaves - has not been agreed and Prime Minister Boris Johnson has pledged to leave whether one is reached or not.

In the event of leaving without a deal, the UK would become an independent coastal state and leave the Common Fisheries Policy, which is the EU's shared rules about how much fish countries can catch and where.

Defra's internal email mentioned a number of media stories, including one being worked on by a freelance journalist for the Independent.

According to the memo, the story planned to look at the preparation being made to deter EU fishermen from UK waters in the case of a no-deal Brexit, and also whether the UK will enforce the exclusion of foreign vessels.

The note reads: "While our public position on this wider issue is already clear and widely communicated, in that post-Brexit we will be an independent coastal state with control of our waters, both policy and MoD have indicated we are not on an overly strong footing to get ahead of the potential claims that could arise from this story.

"At this stage, there is a lot of uncertainty about the sufficiency of enforcement in a no-deal because we have 12 vessels that need to monitor a space three times the size of the surface area of the UK."

Admiral Lord West, a Labour peer and former First Sea Lord, said the email appeared to show the UK has "insufficient assets to patrol and look after our exclusive economic zone for fisheries and also our territorial seas.

"This will be thrown into stark relief if we should cease to have an agreement with the EU on fisheries."

He added: "This is something a number of us have been saying for some time now but it has always been denied by Defra and the government."

A government spokesperson confirmed an internal email concerned with the "veracity and details of media enquiries" had been "inadvertently sent outside of Defra".

They said: "Britain is leaving the EU on Oct 31 with or without a deal.

"We are confident that we will have the ships and the expertise we need to properly enforce security in UK waters."

Meanwhile, Michael Gove, the Cabinet minister in charge of preparations for a possible no-deal Brexit has said a government support fund for British businesses will help companies deal with any "bumps in the road".

Mr Gove spoke openly for the first time about the package known as Operation Kingfisher during a visit to Northern Ireland on Friday.

BBC political correspondent Jessica Parker said the plans predate Boris Johnson's premiership but few details have been so far revealed - including how much money will be made available and where the cash would come from.

According to the Times, the government has compiled a list of companies it believes could be most exposed financially if the UK leaves the EU without a deal and in need of help. It is said to include a number of firms in the construction and manufacturing sectors.

Boris Johnson’s controversial enforcer, Dominic Cummings, an architect of Brexit and a fierce critic of Brussels, is co-owner of a farm that has received €250,000 (£235,000) in EU farming subsidies, the Observer can reveal.
[...]
The revelation opens Cummings up to charges of hypocrisy, as writing on his blog, he has attacked the use of agricultural subsidies “dreamed up in the 1950s and 1960s” because they “raise prices for the poor to subsidise rich farmers while damaging agriculture in Africa”.

He notoriously came up with the claim that leaving the EU would allow the UK to spend an extra £350m a week on the NHS. His blog clarified the claim, explaining “the Treasury gross figure is slightly more than £350m of which we get back roughly half, though some of this is spent in absurd ways like subsidies for very rich landowners to do stupid things”.
... ... ...

When all this rubbish started, I thought: ‘Three years trying to get out of the EU, and the next three trying to get back in.’ Now I’m not so sure. Make it more like five years of tedious, hypocritical fiddling, as British governments try to reconnect severed veins and sinews while pretending that they are doing no such thing. What will they call a reconstituted customs union – a Zone of Provisional Tariff Suspension? And that’s supposing the English public won’t once again throw any agreement out of the window with Saturday’s night’s beer cans.

But the political damage done so far by Brexit is excellent. It has knocked the plaster off the whole monarchical structure, so that the cracks and gaps are glaring. Nobody knows what the law of state is. Who is in charge: a sovereign Parliament, the citizens through the popular vote, or the cabinet arrogating to itself the royal prerogative? Nobody knows. As a result, we have a House of Commons whose members are largely ex-Remainers committed to a policy they know is wrong for their country. No wonder they are paralysed.

Westminster wasn’t designed to work when no party has a majority and the main parties are split. Small cabals of obsessive MPs block all solutions. So we have leading Tories – not only Johnson – apparently prepared to suspend a sovereign Parliament in order to force through a Brexit meant to restore the sovereignty of Parliament. 

-- Neal Ascherson

Donald Trump’s national security adviser, John Bolton, has said Britain and the US could sign sector-by-sector free-trade deals prior to a comprehensive trade deal as a way of helping the UK cope with the consequences of leaving the EU on 31 October without a deal.

Bolton said the mini-deals, focusing on areas such as the car and other industries, could be negotiated quickly, and would receive overwhelming bipartisan support in Congress. He was speaking after meeting Boris Johnson and senior British officials in London on Monday.
[...]
Bolton, in a briefing with reporters, repeatedly underlined the US administration’s Eurosceptic tendencies by saying he and Trump were “leavers before there were leavers”. “If there was a no-deal Brexit, that would be a decision of the British government. We would support it enthusiastically,” he said.

His chief message on the trip, Bolton continued, was to convey Trump’s desire to see a successful British exit from the EU, adding, “We are with you.” The Johnson-Trump relationship, he said, had “got off to a roaring start” with five phone calls since the British prime minister was elected leader of the Conservative party 18 days ago.

“Britain’s success in successfully exiting the European Union will be a statement about democratic rule and constitutional government”, Bolton said. “That’s important for Britain. But it’s important for the United States, too. So we see a successful exit as being very much in our interest, and there’s no quid pro quo on any of these issues.”

Asked to expand on this assessment, he continued: “The fashion in the European Union is when the people vote the wrong way from the way the elites want to go, is to make the peasants vote again and again until they get it right. There was a vote – everyone knew what the issues were. It is hard to imagine that anyone in this country did not know what was at stake. The result is the way it was. That’s democracy.”

He brushed aside suggestions made by the US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that a no-deal Brexit might endanger the Good Friday agreement by reinstating a hard border on the island of Ireland. He said there was no threat to the agreement that he could see.

Britain, he said, was “not going to crash out even if there is a no-deal exit. World Trade Organization rules apply. So we’ve got lots of agreements, bilateral and some multilateral within that context, that can be used as models.”
... ... ...

Opponents of chaotic exit from EU still divided on strategy to outmanoeuvre Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson is preparing for a parliamentary battle against MPs trying to block a no-deal Brexit in the second week of September, as his cross-party opponents continue to be divided about the best way to stop the UK crashing out on 31 October.

A senior government source said Downing Street believed the first legislative showdown over no deal would be on 9 September, when parliament is due to debate a progress report on power-sharing in Northern Ireland.

The expectation is that a cross-party group of MPs will try to use this to carve out time to legislate against a no-deal Brexit by requesting an extension to article 50.

The prime minister could face a confidence motion brought by Jeremy Corbyn aimed at collapsing his government as early as 3 September, when MPs return from their summer break.

Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, said on Monday that an early confidence motion in the prime minister “has to be an option”. However, senior Labour and rebel Conservative sources are sceptical about whether they have the numbers to defeat Johnson at this stage, as many Tory MPs still believe there are legislative routes to prevent a no-deal Brexit that have to be exhausted first.

One source close to a former cabinet minister, who is coordinating efforts to stop no-deal, said they believe at least five or six Conservative MPs would be needed to vote against Johnson’s government, but “the numbers aren’t there yet”. This is because several independent MPs and possibly some Labour MPs opposed to a second referendum could abstain or vote with the government.

One independent MP said speculation about a no-confidence vote immediately after recess was “jumping ahead of events”. “You need Tory rebels to win, and they have to have a reason to support it,” the MP said. “It can’t just be tokenistic, and it can’t just be because Boris isn’t the leader you wanted. There has to be a coherent reason and a coherent subsequent plan to stop no deal.”

As uncertainty clouds the confidence vote, there are several different cross-party groups trying to devise legislative ways to stop a no-deal Brexit involving senior Tory MPs such as Dominic Grieve and Philip Hammond.

However, they have not yet agreed on a single strategy, and the Institute for Government warned on Sunday that MPs opposed to no-deal may “find few opportunities to make their move – and time is running out”.

A senior government source said Downing Street expects the first showdown to happen on 9 September because the government is bound by law to provide a report on Northern Ireland on 4 September and to then debate it in parliament within five days.

Boris Johnson may meet key EU leaders, such as Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, but not Ireland’s Leo Varadkar, before the G7 summit in Biarritz, France, at the end of August.

The EU is adamant that the backstop is not up for renegotiation, but the senior government source said there was still hope in Downing Street that a deal might be possible if it became clear that parliament could not prevent no deal on 31 October.

The government source said No 10 was not expecting any breakthrough with the EU until Brussels had seen what happens in the first weeks of September, as the parliamentary battle plays out.

One Tory MP fighting against no deal said this was part of No 10’s effort to unfairly blame their side for frustrating a deal with Brussels, and Downing Street had been quite successful in “picking off” colleagues who were worried about being held responsible. However, the MP said a vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government would have more chance of success later in October, as the reality of no-deal drew nearer and its consequences became more apparent.

They said this was a “very nuclear option” that would only be tried as a last resort, given the risk that this approach could backfire and lead to an election after a no-deal Brexit.

If a no-confidence vote was passed, MPs would first have 14 days to form an alternative government, but if this was unsuccessful an election would be triggered. In this event, Dominic Cummings, Johnson’s senior adviser, has threatened to press ahead with Brexit on 31 October with or without a deal and schedule the election for the days after that date, while parliament is shut down.

The prime minister’s official spokesman said Johnson remained “very clear in his determination to get a deal”. He said: “He believes a deal is in the UK’s and the EU’s best interests and he has said he will be energetic in pursuit of a deal. We very much want a deal, but we’re also clear about what needs to be achieved in order to secure that.”

The spokesman added: “He has held a number of conversations with EU leaders, so has the prime minister’s sherpa, David Frost. We are also making very detailed preparations at home to ensure the UK is ready to leave the EU in all circumstances on 31 October.”

Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, said he had stressed the government’s message that the UK is leaving on October 31 with or without a deal in a conversation with EU commissioner Phil Hogan, saying that “while we’re ready to energetically enter into new negotiations in a spirit of friendship, the backstop must go”.

Earlier, Robert Buckland, the justice secretary, acknowledged that he had previously argued that crashing out of the EU without a deal would be chaos. “[The prime minister] wants to achieve a deal, but if we cannot achieve a deal, then it needs to be as orderly a Brexit as possible. That is why the work of government at the moment is focused hugely on that effort.”

Buckland added that “there is a difference between crashing out and not achieving a deal”, and said ongoing work would “avoid the chaos of a crash-out”.

How far from European policy will the US national security adviser try to pull the UK?
[...]
The aim is to provide the UK with a safety net as it loses access to European markets in a no-deal scenario. It is not quite a bailout, but it underlines how much the Trump administration sees Britain’s exit from the EU as being in the US’s national security interest.

Boltonians have always seen the EU as not just a bureaucratic behemoth or potential rival to US power but an affront to how it believes the world should be ordered. The traditional US argument that Britain inside the EU can act as an influential advocate for Washington’s interests has been jettisoned in the Trump era.

Multilateral power blocs need to be neutered and, as Trump argued in his speech to the UN in 2018, the “doctrine of patriotism” must hold sway. “Around the world, responsible nations must defend against threats to sovereignty not just from global governance, but also from other, new forms of coercion and domination,” he told the general assembly. The US, he said, will always choose independence and cooperation over global governance.

It is quite clear that if Bolton had his way, Brexit would not just liberate Britain but lead to a wider breakup of the EU. It was notable that the only Conservatives he planned to meet outside government on his visit were leading figures in the European Research group such as Bernard Jenkin, Iain Duncan Smith and Bill Cash, not exactly a representative cross-section of the Tory benches.

In championing US support for Brexit, Bolton brushed aside many of the problems of a no-deal exit or US-UK trade deal. No deal represented no risk to the Good Friday agreement, he asserted.

He said he had asked for the threat a US trade deal could pose to the NHS to be explained to him and he had not understood the argument, so he would not comment. Concern about chlorinated chicken being sold to UK consumers was treated largely as a joke. The other side of an argument is not somewhere Bolton often frequents.

But the bigger picture is the extent to which the UK outside the EU will feel required to come under Washington’s sway. Bolton said he respected the UK’s short-term need to focus on Brexit, but he laid down markers on the two issues that most concern the US: the role of the Chinese technology company Huawei in the UK’s 5G network and the future of the Iran nuclear deal.
... ... ...

Ministers are preparing to spend £300m to bring in emergency food and medicine supplies after a no-deal Brexit – including through airlifts.

A £300m “invitation to tender” has been issued in a beefed-up version of Chris Grayling’s notorious contracts with ferry companies, which ended in humiliation for the government.

Some of the supplies will be flown in on trucks loaded onto cargo planes, in addition to the use of trains and ships, new transport secretary Grant Shapps said.

The tender requires companies to deliver goods that are “identified by the government as being critical to the preservation of human and animal welfare and/or national security”.

As well as routes from the EU, new contracts are also being sought for the delivery of supplies “between Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.

The move is the latest example of Boris Johnson preparing the ground for the crash-out Brexit he is threatening on 31 October, if the EU refuses to concede a different exit deal.

But it has echoes of Mr Grayling’s botched attempt to ensure supplies, which cost taxpayers £83m in cancellation fees and a legal payout – having included a contract with a firm that had no ferries.

Mr Shapps denied a report that that all £300m would be spent on airlifting supplies, saying rail and shipping would be used mainly.

He said: “If we do leave without a deal, we'll be ready for it. And your description of £300m of airlifting is completely incorrect, I just want to quash that.

“It is actually a contract, actually an invitation to tender, but not spending a penny at this stage at all.”

Speaking to BBC Radio 4, Mr Shapps added: We may never need it, and that is my goal. But if we do, my goal is also to be fully prepared.”

The move also underlines how the cost of no-deal preparations is soaring, after Michael Gove, the cabinet office minister, announced a bailout fund to prop up businesses at risk of collapse.

Emergency supply routes are being lined up because of official predictions of immediate and enormous queues at UK ports, because of the need for new checks on goods.

The tender, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, seeks “aircraft that can be used for the provision of capacity for the transportation of freight vehicles” into the UK after 31 October.

The government “is seeking to put in place a framework of operators of vessels, trains or aircraft that can be used for the provision of capacity for the transportation of freight vehicles (meaning wheeled goods vehicles including vans, trucks, lorries, HGVs and other equivalents) or wheeled trailers or semi-trailers between the UK and the EEA and/or between Great Britain and Northern Ireland”.

SNP, Plaid and Green MPs willing to talk but Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson dismissive

Rebel Conservative MPs have agreed to meet Jeremy Corbyn to discuss how to stop Boris Johnson pursuing a no-deal Brexit, without committing to backing him as a caretaker leader.

The Tory MPs Dominic Grieve, Caroline Spelman and Oliver Letwin, plus the former Conservative Nick Boles, said they would be willing to enter talks with the Labour leader in the weeks before parliament returns from recess.

“We agree that our common priority should be to work together in parliament to stop a no-deal Brexit and welcome your invitation to discuss the different ways this might be achieved,” they wrote.

Their tone was very different from that of Jo Swinson, the Lib Dem leader, who dismissed the idea of Corbyn leading a caretaker government as nonsense and said the Labour leader would not be able to build even a temporary consensus.
... ... ...

There is still no united front on how to stop the UK crashing out of the EU on 31 October

At least 35 Conservative MPs have fired warning shots to Boris Johnson that they are strongly opposed to a no-deal Brexit. But there is no united front on what outcome they want instead and how far they are prepared to go to stop the UK crashing out of the EU on 31 October.

A tiny minority are seriously considering voting against Johnson in a confidence motion at the earliest opportunity, with Guto Bebb, a former minister, making the loudest noises about potentially working with the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, and Philip Lee, another former minister, thinking about defecting to the Liberal Democrats.

But a much larger number are still reluctant to make a decisive move against Johnson, hoping that he will pivot towards a deal.

Many of this group are on holiday, giving approval for their signatures to be added to a letter of protest via Skype and WhatsApp.

“I’m in denial to be honest,” said one Conservative MP who is against a no-deal Brexit and is on a break with their family. “I have no idea what I’m going to do in September and even less in October.” Another said she was avoiding the news and trying to forget about politics until hard decisions had to be made when parliament returns.

Here are the major groups among the no-deal rebels – and what motivates them.

The parliamentary brains
Dominic Grieve and Oliver Letwin are the strategists trying to figure out a parliamentary mechanism to prevent a no-deal Brexit without resorting yet to collapsing the government in a confidence vote.

Grieve, a supporter of a second referendum, has been orchestrating these efforts from holiday in Brittany, France, and has indicated he could be willing to vote down Johnson’s administration if other parliamentary means do not work. These Conservatives are joined by a number of Labour thinkers, including Yvette Cooper and Chris Bryant.

The rebel foot soldiers
There are a close bunch of Conservative MPs, many of whom backed Theresa May’s Brexit deal, who are strongly opposed to no deal and are likely to vote against the government for any measure to stop it.

Some, such as Antoinette Sandbach and Jonathan Djanogly, have been rebelling for longer than others, and some, such as Alastair Burt and Sarah Newton, are former ministers who have only recently taken the plunge. However, this group are highly unlikely to back a no-confidence vote if it could lead to a Corbyn government.

The Gaukewards
Led by Philip Hammond, David Gauke and Rory Stewart, this group of former cabinet ministers will hold a fair degree of sway among centrist colleagues. If they support an option, then many others could swing behind them.

They are expected to join legislative efforts to prevent a no deal. It is a possibility that in extremis they could vote down a Johnson government, but they will exert all kinds of political pressure before that point. They are extremely unlikely to back any Corbyn-led temporary government.

The Tories on the edge
These are the most dangerous to Johnson. Bebb has said he is standing down as a Conservative so has little to lose within his own party and this week called Johnson “despicable”. He has said that a short-term Corbyn government is less damaging than the generational damage that would be caused by a no-deal Brexit.

Lee has said he is taking the summer to consider his future in the party. There are several more who say they could not stand again as Conservatives on a no-deal platform and therefore may have no future in Johnson’s party.

Grieve shows no inclination to defect from the party but has suggested he could vote against the government in a vote of no confidence if Johnson pursues no deal, as has the Tory grandee Ken Clarke. If this group swells, the prime minister is in serious trouble.

Those making a point
Some Conservatives have specific motivations. One Tory MP, Alberto Costa, signed the Hammond letter to demand that Johnson legislates to protect citizens’ rights if he is going to pursue a no-deal Brexit.

Others are now committed to a second referendum, including the former education secretary Justine Greening. One of the most interesting in this group is the former minister Sam Gyimah, who gave his name to the letter endorsing the need for a deal even though he voted against it three times and wants a second referendum in all circumstances.

These are an unpredictable bunch – and no one knows just how far they might go in pursuit of their preferred option.

The ministers
Amber Rudd and Matt Hancock do not want a no-deal Brexit. Boris Johnson assured them there was only a tiny chance of one to gain their support in the leadership election.

Nicky Morgan, who once joined efforts to ensure a parliamentary vote on the deal, is now in the cabinet and backed the Malthouse compromise for a managed no deal. Likewise, Jo Johnson, the prime minister’s brother, who had backed a second referendum, is back in the bosom of government. They are ultra loyal for now.

But if it comes to a Johnson government making no deal the official policy and committing to the UK crashing out on 31 October, then their interests may diverge from those of the prime minister. They are keeping their powder dry, but walkouts to oppose a no-deal Brexit cannot be ruled out in the months to come.

Westminster wasn’t designed to work when no party has a majority and the main parties are split. Small cabals of obsessive MPs block all solutions. So we have leading Tories – not only Johnson – apparently prepared to suspend a sovereign Parliament in order to force through a Brexit meant to restore the sovereignty of Parliament. 

-- Neal Ascherson

The Sunday Times obtains the government’s classified ‘Yellowhammer’ report in full

Britain faces shortages of fuel, food and medicine, a three-month meltdown at its ports, a hard border with Ireland and rising costs in social care in the event of a no-deal Brexit, according to an unprecedented leak of government documents that lay bare the gaps in contingency planning.

The documents, which set out the most likely aftershocks of a no-deal Brexit rather than worst-case scenarios, have emerged as the UK looks increasingly likely to crash out of the EU without a deal.

Compiled this month by the Cabinet Office under the codename Operation Yellowhammer, the dossier offers a rare glimpse into the covert planning being carried out by the government to avert a catastrophic collapse in the nation’s infrastructure.

The file, marked “official-sensitive” — requiring security clearance on a “need to know” basis — is remarkable because it gives the most comprehensive assessment of the UK’s readiness for a no-deal Brexit.

It states that the public and businesses remain largely unprepared for no deal and that growing “EU exit fatigue” has hampered contingency planning which has stalled since the UK’s original departure date in March.

A senior Whitehall source said: “This is not Project Fear — this is the most realistic assessment of what the public face with no deal. These are likely, basic, reasonable scenarios — not the worst case.”

The revelations include:

● The government expects the return of a hard border in Ireland as current plans to avoid widespread checks will prove “unsustainable”; this may spark protests, road blockages and “direct action”

● Logjams caused by months of border delays could “affect fuel distribution”, potentially disrupting the fuel supply in London and the southeast of England

● Up to 85% of lorries using the main Channel crossings “may not be ready” for French customs and could face delays of up to 2 1/2 days

● Significant disruption at ports will last up to three months before the flow of traffic “improves” to 50-70% of the current rate

● Petrol import tariffs, which the government has set at 0%, will “inadvertently” lead to the closure of two oil refineries, 2,000 job losses, widespread strike action and disruptions to fuel availability

● Up to 85% of lorries using the main Channel crossings “may not be ready” for French customs and could face delays of up to 2 1/2 days

● Significant disruption at ports will last up to three months before the flow of traffic “improves” to 50-70% of the current rate

● Petrol import tariffs, which the government has set at 0%, will “inadvertently” lead to the closure of two oil refineries, 2,000 job losses, widespread strike action and disruptions to fuel availability

● Protests across the UK, which may “require significant amounts of police resource[s]”

● Rising costs will hit social care, with “smaller providers impacted within 2-3 months and larger providers 4-6 months after exit”

● Gibraltar will face delays of more than four hours at the border with Spain “for at least a few months”, which are likely to “adversely impact” its economy

The revelations come as Boris Johnson signals that he would set a date for a general election after the UK has left the EU if Jeremy Corbyn succeeds in a vote of no confidence — preventing rebels from being able to stop a no-deal Brexit.

Johnson is preparing to hold talks with France’s president, Emmanuel Macron, and Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, ahead of this week’s G7 summit in Biarritz. But No 10 was last night playing down any prospect of a Brexit breakthrough and Germany believes no deal is “highly likely”.

The leak of the Yellowhammer dossier underlines the frustration within Whitehall over the lack of transparency surrounding preparations for leaving the EU. “Successive UK governments have a long history of failing to prepare their citizens to be resilient for their own emergencies,” said a Cabinet Office source.

The absence of a clear picture of the UK’s future relationship with the EU has hindered preparations as it “does not provide a concrete situation for third parties to prepare for”, the document states. Some of the bleakest predictions relate to goods crossing the French border. The file says that on the first day of no deal between “50% and 85% of HGVs travelling via the short channel straits [the main crossings between France and England] may not be ready for French customs, reducing the flow of freight lorries to between 40- 60%” of current levels”.