A deal rather than defiance is the way to win us Brexit
THE country is sliding towards an historic constitutional crisis. Our political system in in meltdown, due to Parliament’s determination to delay Brexit yet again. Last week, an unprincipled alliance of opposition MPs and Tory rebels passed legislation that forces the Government to ask Brussels for another threemonth extension if a new deal is not reached at the next EU summit in mid-October.
But the Prime Minister seems resolute in his resistance, declaring dramatically last week that he would “rather die in a ditch” than indulge in further procrastination.
This stance is typical of the robustness Boris Johnson has shown since entering Downing Street. To supporters, his ruthless, dynamic strategy is just what the Government needs to finally deliver Brexit after more than three years of drift and dither.
To critics, his approach has been counter-productive, galvanising his Remainer opponents and plunging the Conservatives into turmoil. In a dramatic move on Saturday, Work and Pensions Secretary Amber Rudd resigned from the Cabinet, describing Johnson’s tactics as “an assault on decency and democracy”. She joins more than a score of Tory MPs who broke with the party last week in protest at the Government’s tough policy, among them Johnson’s own brother Jo.
WITH no Commons majority, the Prime Minister looks to be trapped. The obvious escape route is an immediate general election. This could provide him with a powerful mandate, given the Tories are well ahead in the polls, and would bring a welcome end to the gridlocked and Brexit-wrecking Parliament, which is devoid of integrity or respect for the public.
But the Labour-dominated
opposition is blocking this move, despite all its vociferous demands for a new poll. Its refusal is based partly on fear of defeat, partly on the wish to see the Brexit delay fully implemented, and partly on the urge to prolong Johnson’s torment.
Their continued intransigence has prompted speculation the Government could come up with creative measures, such as putting a motion of no confidence in itself to force an election, or engineering our country’s expulsion from the EU by refusing to appoint a new British commissioner. The former is too outlandish, the latter too ineffectual. Just as forlorn is the hope the EU might reject an extension, as France and EU negotiator Guy Verhofstadt suggested yesterday. There is no reason Brussels would do this, not least because the Eurocrats want our money. We heard the same talk in March about a French veto. It came to nothing.
In reality, Boris has only three choices. He could resign, refuse to implement Parliament’s new law or, best of all, focus on a revised Withdrawal Agreement. Superficially, resignation avoids the humiliation of having to make an appeal to Brussels for another delay, something he has repeatedly vowed never to do. With his pledge intact, he could then fight the next election on a clean Brexit platform, perhaps backed by a pact with Nigel Farage’s party.
But this option carries the terrible risk of installing Jeremy Corbyn in power as a caretaker Prime Minister.
FAR worse is the idea that last week’s legislation might be defied, with Government figures hinting its implementation could be blocked. Test the Parliamentary boundaries by all means, but toughness in negotiations cannot stretch to ignoring the law.
That is the stuff of despots and revolutionaries, not British Government ministers who are meant to be guardians of the rule of law. Such a manoeuvre would make a mockery of a Brexit which is meant to bring back Parliamentary sovereignty not destroy it.
Instead of flirting with this lurid new brand of Tory Bolshevism, the Government should concentrate its energies on securing an improved EU deal. This could be done by amendments to the Irish backstop, either through the introduction of a time limit or by a stipulation that it should relate only to Northern Ireland.
That second point is, after all, what the EU and most of Ulster originally wanted, but the weakened Government, dependent on the Democratic Unionists, insisted that the backstop apply to the United Kingdom.
Given the scale of the present crisis, that requirement should be dropped. The sense of urgency means that a new agreement would probably be passed by the Commons, since hardline Tory opposition would be outweighed by support from moderate Labour MPs in Leave heartlands.
If he concentrates on a deal rather than judicial defiance, Boris could still deliver Brexit.
‘Resigning carries the risk Corbyn could become a caretaker PM’