,
19 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
A thread on 'the will of the people', inspired in large part by @seanjonesqc's question time reflections: 1/
We know that in June 2016 a majority voted to leave. I know all about the issues concerning the legality of the vote and the mandate. I know that it was not an 'instruction' to Parliament to 'deliver Brexit'; but let's assume (for now) that it was. 2/
Leave won over remain. It was, no more, no less, a vote to change our existing relationship with the EU, in favour of a new relationship with the EU. Evidently, the new relationship could take many forms. The leave campaigns were a broad church. 3/
The Government opted for a 'deep and special' relationship, set out its red lines, closed its ears, and, in negotiation with the EU, produced the WA in November 2018. 4/
All the while, it promised the easiest trade deal in history with the EU, and depicted a world of opportunity for the UK. It was (remember those days?) seeking to build excitement about the UK's future, free from the shackles of the EU. 5/
Inevitably, the WA did not match the (impossible) expectations. It provides for rule-taker transition, a backstop to guarantee no hard border in Ireland, and a vague aspirational declaration on the future. 6/
It has been rejected not by a 'remainer Parliament', but by Brexiters. In her most optimistic moments, Theresa May might envisage it limping to a fraught Parliamentary majority. 7/
The scene will be set for a battle over the Withdrawal Agreement Bill, and then two (or more) years of negotiations with the EU, aiming to define the future relationship. 8/
It is hardly an appetising prospect. Anyway... the reason some (not many...) support the WA, is because they feel an obligation to respect the will of the people, and to deliver Brexit. 9/
But others, on all sides, with imv equal validity, are opposing the WA, for exactly the same reason: the WA is 'not the will of the people', it is not Brexit, it does not represent a good enough basis for the UK's new relationship with the EU. 10/
That is true of (eg) Jacob Rees-Mogg and Jeremy Corbyn. The WA is also, of course, strongly opposed by those who would prefer to remain in the EU. 11/
The Government's fundamental failure (going back before 2016) was to fail to articulate, and build support for, a vision of Brexit behind which popular opinion (from both leave and remain) might begin to coalesce. 12/
As a result, there is no version of Brexit (from Norway, to the WA, to the Malthouse Compromise (it lives on here!), to no deal) which can claim to represent the will of the people. 13/
This fact should help those who are campaigning for remain. The response to those who argue (as they did on question time) that 'MPs should just get on with it', should be 'yes; what would you have them do (eg re trade, free movement, Ireland)?'. 14/
Answers there will be many. We can all compare notes. And that is precisely the problem. Just 14 days from March 29, we, as a country, have no understanding of what we want from Brexit. 15/
We cannot articulate what Brexit means. The country wants MPs to get on with it... but has no collective sense of what they should be doing. Paddling furiously, going nowhere. 16/
A people's vote does little to solve this crisis. In fact, the people's vote deprives leavers of the chance to argue for 'their' better leave. But most will still want to leave (even if they don't like the WA); and will resent being asked again. 17/
The only way forward is to build a stronger consensus, in Parliament, and in the country, for a particular vision of Brexit. The Government has singularly failed to do so (it could have started with the Cabinet...). 18/
It has instead hidden behind the 'will of the people' slogan, without taking the time to interrogate just what that will might be. 19/19
