Parliament is Voting…. Democracy in Action! (Old News Now)

MPs back government's Brexit timetable.

MPs have voted to back the government's plan to start formal talks on Brexit by the end of March next year. They also supported a Labour motion calling for Parliament to "properly scrutinise" the government in its proposals for leaving the EU. The votes followed a compromise between Labour and the Conservatives, who had argued over the questions to be put. The House of Commons' decisions are not binding on ministers. MPs backed Labour's motion, saying the government should publish a plan and it was "Parliament's responsibility to properly scrutinise the government" over Brexit, by 448 votes to 75 - a margin of 373. This followed another vote over the government's amendment to the motion, which added the proviso that its timetable for triggering Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, getting formal talks with the EU under way, should be respected. MPs backed this by 461 votes to 89 - a margin of 372.

Supreme Court Brexit case told Scotland should get say on Brexit.

Scotland's top legal officer has said the Scottish Parliament's consent is needed before the UK triggers Brexit. Lord Advocate James Wolffe said he was not arguing Holyrood had a veto, but said its consent was required because of the "significant changes" Brexit would make to its powers. He was speaking on day three of the Supreme Court battle over who can invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty. Ministers say they can do so with without consulting Parliament. But campaigners dispute this, and earlier on Wednesday their lead lawyer said the government's argument "violates" basic principles of constitutional law. Lord Wolffe, who will continue his argument on Thursday, agreed the UK Parliament should be consulted, and argued that Holyrood should also have a say. The UK government has already responded to his argument, telling the court on Tuesday it was "fatally undermined" by powers over foreign affairs being reserved to Westminster.

Supreme Court president: Court won't overturn Brexit vote.

The historic Brexit legal challenge has drawn to a close with a reminder from the Supreme Court that it will not "overturn the result of the EU referendum". Lord Neuberger said the case focused on "the process by which that result can lawfully be brought into effect". The Supreme Court president promised a decision "as soon as possible". The hearing ended with the government's lawyer arguing ministers have the authority to trigger Brexit. The case centres on the whether the UK government has the power to serve notice of its intention to quit the EU under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty or whether, as various campaigners have claimed, it must seek Parliament's authorisation. The first case to be heard before all Supreme Court 11 justices, it has pitted some of the leading figures in the legal world against each other and included arguments from Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Food industry warns of higher prices without EU workers.

The UK faces higher food prices without continued access to EU workers, 30 food and drink associations have warned. In a letter published in the Guardian, they argue that EU workers play an important role in the supply chain and some are already starting to leave. It called on the government to offer "unambiguous reassurance" about their right to remain. The Home Office said in response it was "harnessing the industry's knowledge" and "ensuring their voice was heard". Nearly four million people in the UK are employed in everything from harvesting to production to selling food and drink. In food manufacturing just under a third of workers are from the EU. "Workers from the EU, some of whom are already leaving the UK, play a significant role in delivering affordable and high-quality food and drink," the letter said. "The government should offer unambiguous reassurance to EU workers throughout our supply chain about their right to remain. For the longer term, it is important to recognise that these workers are highly flexible and provide an essential reservoir of skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled labour." The trade associations also warn that the country's food security is at risk and that many workers are already leaving in the wake of the Brexit vote and the fall in the value of the pound. They call for the importance of the industry to be recognised to the country's "economic and physical wellbeing" and argue that it should receive equal treatment to the financial or automotive sectors. "All options should be explored, including a workable points-based system for shortage occupations, sector-based and seasonal/guest worker schemes and effective transitionary arrangements," they say. "If they are not, the UK will face less food choice and higher food prices." Signatories to the letter include the Food and Drink Federation, the Association of Cereal Food Manufacturers and the British Beer and Pubs Association.

Chancellor urges Brexit interim deal.

Chancellor Philip Hammond has backed a transitional deal for Brexit saying it would be "helpful" to allow longer than two years for the UK's EU exit. Mr Hammond told the Treasury select committee that there was an "emerging view" that having longer would tend towards a "smoother transition". There would be "less risks of disruption" including "crucially risks to financial stability", he added. However, both business and government would have to make changes, he said. His comments are being seen as the strongest signal yet from the government that the Brexit process could take a lot longer than the two years needed for the official Article 50 exit process to be completed. On Monday the Treasury Select Committee called for written submissions on transitional arrangements as part of its inquiry into the UK's future economic relationship with the EU. It defines "transitional arrangements" as being "any arrangement that takes effect between the point at which the UK formally leaves the EU... and the point at which the UK's final, settled relationship with the EU becomes effective. I would not want anybody to think this is just about financial services," Mr Hammond told MPs. “For example, depending on what future customs arrangements are between the UK and European Union, there could be significant physical infrastructure changes that need to be made at ports of entry and exit, not only in the UK but on continental Europe as well," he added. He said there could also be a need to train large numbers of people in anticipation of a "much more intensive process at borders. So it's not just the business sector, it's also the government sector that has to think about how long it takes to make changes, hire people, train people, introduce IT changes. And I think the further we go into this discussion, the more likely it is that we will mutually conclude that we need a longer period to deliver," he added.

All details above from BBC News website.

[…and it’s gone all quiet again as Civil Servants and numberless Consultants on both sides of the Channel produce ‘position papers’ and strive the get their ‘principles’ the best position at their particular tables. In other words we’re seeing the opening moves in the ‘Phoney Brexit’ before the real negotiations start and the mudslinging inevitably kicks off. That’s when the shocks will come and the chickens, now well and truly roasted, will be coming home.]

"People's lives were entirely their own, perhaps - and more justifiably - when the world seemed enormous, and all its comings and goings were slow and deliberate. But this is so no longer, and never will be again, since man's inventions have eliminated so much of distance and time; for better, for worse, we are now each of us part of the surge and swell of great economic and political movements, and whatever we do, as individuals or as nations, deeply affects everyone else."

Vera Brittain, Testament of Youth, 1933. 

Cartoon Time.

Evidence of ancient 'geological Brexit' revealed.

By Rebecca Morelle

Science Correspondent, BBC News

4th April 2017

The UK has now started the formal process of leaving the EU, but scientists say they have evidence of a much earlier "Brexit". They have worked out how a thin strip of land that once connected ancient Britain to Europe was destroyed. The researchers believe a large lake overflowed 450,000 years ago, damaging the land link, then a later flood fully opened the Dover Strait. The scars of these events can be found on the seabed of the English Channel. The study is published in the journal Nature Communications. Professor Sanjeev Gupta, who led the study, from Imperial College London, said: "This was really one of the defining events for North West Europe - and certainly the defining event in Britain's history. This chance geological event, if it hadn't happened, would have meant Britain was always connected to the continent."

More than half a million years ago, in the midst of an Ice Age, a land bridge connected Dover in the South of England to Calais in northern France. Immediately to the north of it, was a huge glacial lake, which had formed at the edge of an ice sheet that covered much of Europe. The researchers believe that this lake started to overflow, sending vast amounts of water crashing over the land bridge. The evidence for this was found at the bottom of the English Channel. Decades ago, engineers who were surveying the seabed for the Channel Tunnel, discovered a series of mysterious large underwater holes. Now further scrutiny has revealed that they were most likely caused by the lake overspill. Prof Gupta said: "These holes are now in-filled with sediment, but what's interesting is that they are not linear features like canyons or valleys - they are isolated depressions. And they occur in a line - a whole series of them stretching between Dover and Calais. And they are huge, 100m-deep carved into the bedrock and hundreds of metres to several kilometres in diameter. So we interpret these as giant plunge pools. We think there was basically lake water plunging over this rock ridge in the Dover Strait through a whole series of waterfalls, which then eroded and carved out these depressions. It's difficult to explain them by any other mechanism."

The researchers believe the lake started to overflow about 450,000 years ago, which would have seriously weakened the land bridge. But they think a second catastrophic flood that took place about 150,000 years ago would have destroyed it altogether. "We see this huge valley carved through the strait, about eight to 10km wide... and it has a lot of features that are suggestive of flood erosion," said Prof Gupta. Co-author Jenny Collier, also from Imperial College London, said it was not clear what caused either of these events. She said: "Perhaps part of the ice sheet broke off, collapsing into the lake, causing a surge that carved a path for the water to cascade off the chalk ridge. In terms of the catastrophic failure of the ridge, maybe an earth tremor, which is still characteristic of this region today, further weakened the ridge. This may have caused the chalk ridge to collapse, releasing the megaflood that we have found evidence for in our studies." The researchers would now like to work out more precise timings of the "geological Brexit". This would mean drilling into the bottom of the Dover Strait and analysing the age of the sediment. "But that would be a huge undertaking," admitted Prof Gupta. "The English Channel is the world's busiest shipping lane and it has huge tidal currents. It will be hugely challenging."

[Imagine how different European, and probably World, history would have been if the land bridge to the Continent had not been washed away all that time ago. What would have stopped Napoleon from marching across France and into England? Could the British army have stopped him? Probably, but could we have stopped Hitler in 1940? I doubt that very much. After Dunkirk the Channel protected us from imminent invasion. Without it? Well, just say that the world would be a very different place with a very different past! I might very well be speculating about how different things would have been if the land bridge had been washed away – except I’d be typing this in German. Interesting to speculate isn’t it?]

Happy Birthday to Me - 57 Today!

Just Finished Reading: Insurgent by Veronica Roth (FP: 2012)

After the Erudite coup and the defeat of the Dauntless resistance led by Four (Theo James in the 2015 movie adaptation) and Tris (Shailene Woodley) the rag-tag band are on the run and hiding out in Amity planning their next move. Soon forced on they make a break for it and stumble upon a group planning for a counter-assault on Erudite – but not one any of them had imagined: The Factionless which an even more unimaginable leader, someone Four knows very well indeed. But they need much more than that to be successful against the plans of Jeanine (Kate Winslett). They need the loyal members of Dauntless and they need one more thing – anyone who is Divergent.

I think I actually enjoyed this movie even more than the first film in the series (the third was honestly terrible and there’s no great surprise that the fourth film never even made it into production). So you can imagine that I was looking forward to finally reading the book. After the first book had been realised on screen with whole scenes cut from one medium into the other I was expecting something similar – with the added depth and background often provided by the space available in a novel. But after a promising start (with lots of little details not seen in the movie – including the fact that Amity literally drug their people into happiness!) the plot began to wander and muddled. I struggled to get it back into focus although this was hardly helped by comparing the novel to the movie every step of the way. Tris was a lot angrier in the book as well as a lot younger than in the film. Her brother was still ultimately a traitor but nowhere near as craven as he was portrayed in the movie. Marcus played a more central role in the book drip feeding Tris and the readership as to the ‘secret’ information that Erudite wanted to stop becoming common knowledge. But there was much less emphasis on the power of Divergence except as a perceived danger to Erudite’s master plan. Some of the movies pivotal scenes did come from the book but in different form and in a different sequence. People who died in the movie survived in the book and so on. It was all a bit confusing although on average I thought that the movie had a smoother and better realised plot. A straight translation just wouldn’t have worked on the big screen.

Saying all that this wasn’t a bad book at all. It was a fast enough read and had some facts and pointers which helped to explain the Faction system and the underlying motivations of some of the characters – especially Peter – which didn’t come across in the film. Overall if you enjoyed the film you should enjoy the book too. Just be aware that it’s rather different in places. Reasonable. This was the last of my movie related novels and it’s been an interesting experience. More books into movies to come. Next up – after a one book ‘filler’ is my last Random 10 for quite some time…..      

Cartoon Time.

My house.... Post-Retirement!

Job Opportunities Galore…….

Brexit: UK ready to 'buy in' trade experts.

The UK is retraining civil servants as post-Brexit trade negotiators but is also set to "buy in" expertise from outside, a top official has told MPs. The UK's capacity to negotiate trade deals with other countries after Brexit has been queried, with up to 100 staff needed alone for a single agreement. Oliver Griffiths said negotiators were not "mythical creatures" and current staff had many of the skills required. But he said the civil service would need to recruit "across the piece". Whitehall is expected to have to recruit thousands - as many as 30,000 according to a recent internal Deloitte's assessment - of civil servants to deal with the challenge of extricating the UK from the EU after June's referendum vote. There are particular concerns about a shortage of trade negotiators, given that many of the UK's most experienced professionals in this field are currently working for the EU - which arranges trade deals for all member states including the UK - and are not guaranteed to return.

David Davis: UK may pay for access to EU single market.

The UK would consider making payments to the EU after it leaves the bloc to secure the best possible access to the EU single market, Brexit Secretary David Davis has said. Mr Davis told MPs the "major criterion" was getting the best access for goods and services to the European market. "And if that is included... then of course we would consider it." But Brexit-backing Tory Peter Bone said "people would be absolutely outraged" if the UK continued to pay the EU. His comments prompted sterling to rise by 1% to $1.26 against the dollar. But Mr Bone told the BBC: "People will be absolutely outraged if we came out of the EU and then carried on paying them £15bn a year, £20bn a year, whatever the figure is - no I don't think it's going to happen. In that very hypothetical case people will be exceptionally upset about it. But it's just not going to happen." However, Chancellor Philip Hammond backed Mr Davis, saying: "You can't go into any negotiation expecting to get every single objective that you set out with and concede nothing along the way - it will have to be a deal that works for both sides. I think David Davis is absolutely right not to rule out the possibility that we might want to contribute in some way to some form of mechanism."

Brexit EU customs union deal possible - trade minister.

The UK could seek a deal which would allow sections of the economy to remain within the EU's customs union after Brexit, international trade minister Greg Hands has suggested. Mr Hands said officials would be able to choose the type of products to be covered by agreements. The union operates alongside the EU's single market and free trade area. It comes after the Brexit secretary said the UK would consider paying for "best possible" single market access. The customs union includes all 28 EU nations, but also Turkey, Monaco, San Marino, Andorra and non-EU UK territories such as the Channel Islands. They enjoy free trade with each other, but must impose the same tariffs on goods from nations outside the pact and are barred from doing bilateral trade deals with other countries. Bloomberg news agency published remarks Mr Hands made in an interview this week in which he said the "history of international trade has got all kinds of examples of customs unions." He said the UK could be selective about which individual sectors it wished to be covered by any customs union arrangement. "You can choose which markets, which products the customs unions affect and which they don't, so there isn't a binary thing of being inside the customs union or outside of the customs union," he said.

Boris Johnson: UK won't block EU defence co-operation.

Britain will not seek to obstruct European efforts to develop closer defence co-operation after Brexit, Boris Johnson has said. In a speech in London, the foreign secretary said: "If they want to do that, fine," but said countries should ensure they met their Nato commitments. Defence Secretary Michael Fallon has previously said the UK would oppose the move because it could "undermine" Nato. France and Germany have made the case for increased military co-operation. In March 2015, European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker declared a common European army was needed to face up to Russia and other threats. In August 2016, the leaders of the Czech Republic and Hungary said a joint European army was needed to bolster security in the EU. The idea is thought to have been given impetus by the UK's Brexit vote.

Hard Brexit 'could cost Tories next election' – MPs.

Pursuing a "hard" Brexit could alienate core Conservative voters and cost the party the next general election, a group of Tory MPs has warned. The group - which includes ex-attorney general Dominic Grieve - said "a moderate core" of Tory voters do not want the party to become "UKIP-lite". PM Theresa May must ensure she is not "pushed" into a hard Brexit, they said. It comes as the Lib Dems overturned a 23,015 Conservative majority to win Thursday's Richmond Park by-election. Ex-Tory MP Zac Goldsmith stood as an independent after leaving the Conservative Party, but Lib Dem Sarah Olney - who fought the campaign on the issue of Brexit - won by more than 1,800 votes. Writing in the Observer newspaper, Mr Grieve, former Foreign Office minister Alistair Burt, ex-transport minister Claire Perry, education select committee chairman Neil Carmichael, and Bath MP Ben Howlett, said the Richmond Park result must serve as a wake-up call for the party. "The Conservative Party needs to be alert that there is a moderate core of Conservative voters, who voted Remain, and who want to hear the Conservative government speaking above the noise of the Brexiters," the quintet wrote. "They do not want the Conservative party to be UKIP-lite, nor to hear that their desire for a negotiated Brexit, with all options open for the prime minister, is an attempt to delay the process or simply an expression of Remoaning." The Richmond Park result should be a reminder "that their votes have another destination if we don't get this right," they added.

All details above from BBC News website.

[Of course for the next few months at least we’ll be in that weird ‘Phoney Brexit’ period where the process has started (along with the clock) but nothing has actually happened yet. It’s far too early for any talks to take place but I guess that they’ll be talking about the scheduling about preliminary talks. At the moment it’ll be minions rushing around trying to get their bosses in the same place at the same time so that the real horse trading can kick off. I’m not expecting much to come from this until the end of the summer or even Christmas time.]