Good point to revisit this, esp as Frost was already heading for door. If Johnson is setting policy then more accommodating line might stick, but now (as then) big challenge is backbench revolt
Johnson's standing with MPs is clearly less than it was a fortnight ago, so does revolt potential mean he picks a hard Brexiter (and eoukd that person what to get him out of a hole? Or be allowed to make their own policy choices) or are we in 1922 territory?
Track record tells us Johnson would struggle to give up control [sic] of Brexit policy, so finding new minister who is both unimpeachable for ERG types and pliable for No.10 is going to be pretty much impossible: eg Baker has already distanced himself
Maybe he dissolves position altogether in a 'Frosty sorted out all the big stuff' pitch and then farm out role to various others and keep NIP aside for someone ealing to play ball

Gove, under his nations hat?
Whatever happens, Frost leaving early really messes with scope to frame this in any positive light, so much of the damage is already done
All this said, feels like Omicron is more likely to tip party over the line on Johnson and that will certainly be at forefront of most minds in next two weeks

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with Simon Usherwood

Simon Usherwood Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Usherwood

18 Dec
Frost's op-ed this morning revisits the UK position that the NIP isn't working and negotiations haven't found a solution, so Art.16 remains on the table. But let's parse his comments on the CJEU for a bit

on.ft.com/3yEAh69
It's not any clear softening from June's Command Paper, so we have to keep the recent weeks in that context

But it is not totally unambiguous
The issue is presented here partly as a 'hair trigger response' and partly as having disputes 'settled' by the court

Both are consistent with current NIP language
Read 6 tweets
25 Nov
Very happy to be back at @SurreyCbe for a top quality discussion on UK-EU Secuirty & Defence cooperation post-Brexit with @LordRickettsP @rwainwright67 Image
Both speakers highlighting the increased difficulties of cooperation without EU structures and the need for finding new modalities
Open Q of whether existing links (based on 'can-do' mentality per @LordRickettsP) will endure: much scope for progressive divergence by neglect

Data protection also teeters on the edge
Read 5 tweets
21 Nov
Important shift in tone, but Q is whether this is structural or tactical

(More likely the latter)

1/
A couple of weeks ago, Art.16 use was being talked up a lot, as well as role of CJEU. And yes, I thought it would happen too

So what's changed?

2/
Fundamentally, nothing

Frost's critique hasn't moved (as seen in his less emollient interventions) and no sign that negotiations have changed any basic elements of NIP

3/
Read 8 tweets
10 Nov
Let's kick the tyres on what the UK might do next week on this

tl;dr UK has left itself minimal space to avoid blame, whatever happens
If we follow line that UK wants COP26 out of the way, then next week it likely moment of decision

Negotiations aren't moving, so it's time to sh*t or get off the pot with this

2/
UK knows it can't leave Art.16 out there much longer, both because it's talked up availability/necessity of its use and because there's already been much delay

Absent any big EU move on NIP (on top of what they already did), UK has to show this isn't stuck in the snow

3/
Read 14 tweets
8 Nov
Since we're all going to need it, some detail on suspending/terminating the TCA

PDF: bit.ly/UshGraphic95

A few thoughts too

1/
The suspension provisions under Art.772 aren't simple or a free-for-all, as you have to make a strong case for their use and you're bound to be proportionate

2/
By contrast, the general (Art.779) and Part (Art.591/692) provisions on termination don't need any justifications or thresholds, or even to talk about it, so they're much less liable to challenge

3/
Read 6 tweets
1 Nov
Given that my plan to be on leave while the whole Jersey fishing thing blew over has come to nothing, here's a guide to what the TCA actually says both on access and on disputes

PDF: bit.ly/UshGraphic94

Some thoughts too

1/
Like much of the rest of the TCA, there's a lot that isn't well-specified. Vessels should 'demonstrate' historic access, but how that works practically isn't clear: what's the benchmark and relevant case-law to draw on? (@chris_huggins any equivalent cases?)

2/
Also note provisions at end of Art.502, which suggest this was something the drafters thought might well be reworked, so sense of a bodge is evident

3/
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(