,
89 tweets,
8 min read
Read on Twitter
David Davis up in the Commons for Brexit questions parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/ae…
"We made important progress..." Labour benches start laughing.
(BTW will be commenting using these threaded tweets, so mute the first one now if you want to avoid an unspeakable load of hogwash)
DD says UK nationals in EU will get no voting rights, but UK is wants to grant municipal voting rights to EU citizens in UK.
Message obviously is that British offer on EU citizens is more generous and comprehensive.
"Strong mutual interest in UK & Euratom continuing to work closely in future". He presents broad aspirations as concrete achievement.
More laughs and jeering as DD says UK "substantially more flexible" than EU.
DD says there has been "concrete progress" on Ireland. He doesn't really provide any details to justify that statement.
On divorce bill: "UK has duty to our tax payers to interrogate that [EU] position... line by line."
Says UK & EU have very different legal opinions on it. "There are significant differences to be bridged in this sector." Can say that again.
DD complaining about sequencing of talks. Why he had a fit about this after conceding it is a continued source of bafflement to me.
For one idea on how to get past this problem, see my Progress piece from earlier today prospectmagazine.co.uk/politics/welco…
DD: "No-one has ever pretended this would be simple or easy." Incredible.
Here he is never promising it would be simple or easy last year
Starmer up now. Says he accepts it is complex and that some first sequence talks can only be handled in second sequence, like Irish border.
KS: "No-deal, which I had thought had died a death... could rise from the ashes." Someone on Tory benches shouts: "Great."
KS: "Fantasy to think you can have deep and comprehensive trade deal without shared institutions." Might as well teach DD the times table.
KS now having good time highlighting quotes from ministers showing they did think it was easy.
KS. On 16 Aug you put 'track and trace' customs idea forward. Removed on 1st Sept as "blue skies thinking".
KS: Does DD accept it;s time to drop some of PM's flawed red lines so UK can genuinely be flexible?
DD now back on his feet, trying to look head-masterly. Looks more like a schoolboy who has been found out.
DD: "Does Labour party want to pay 100bn euros to get progress? Eh? Eh? I hope the answer is no."
"We are going to do this the proper way." Unimaginable levels of hypocrisy here.
DD: "Blue skies thinking is not to rubbish something. It's to say it's a very imaginative way forward". Commons falls about laughing.
No answer from DD on dropping red lines. Ken Clarke now up. I fangirl hard.
Ministers once put great eight on german car manufacturers. Now, does he accept all trade agreements need pooling of sovereignty
and "always take years to negotiate or modify". So will DD exhibit some "imagination" and accept we need to stay in single market
and customs union during transition. Typically brilliant. FANGIRLING.
DD: Issue isn't one of bringing together diff economies. Pointless response. In terms of implementation period, says there's widespread
agreement on need, but length/type depends on various factors. No answer on specifics of SM & CU.
SNP's Peter Grant wants flexible dialogue with devolved nations. SNP approach to opposing Brexit increasingly parochial.
"Concerns of devolved administrations taken on board", DD says. Except of course that he has ignored them completely.
IDS says agreement with EU must come before transition deal. This is common error. It supposes transition is actually about transition.
It isn't. It is an extension of the negotiation window.
Hilary Benn points this out - no time in Article 50 window for talks.
Why won't DD recognise that only way now to provide stability is to say we'll stay in current arrangements for transition?
DD genuinely suggesting we can get "trade outcome" within A50 window. He is now making variation on car manufacturers argument.
Bill Cash, like a living waxwork, accuses Labour of going from "Remainers to Reversers".
DD backs him up, says Labour is "betraying their own voters". Dispiriting even now to see him be so cheap and misleading.
Redwood up now. "I congratulate sec of state in explaining we have no legal liabilities" on divorce.
EU can "either trade with us with no new tariffs or under WTO rules." Redwood been saying this for months now. Is he coin operated?
Anna Soubry again says we should stay in SM and CU. Bafflingly she now says this is not Labour position and that they want to change CU.
(Think that's for final deal, not transition. But anyway extraordinary that Soubry thinks Labour is best target for her question)
Chris Bryant does very good work highlighting extraordinary, historic danger of statutory instruments in repeal bill.
Future Tory leader Jacob Rees Mogg said something but I couldn't be bothered to listen.
DD proudly says Commission was given two and a half hour briefing from British team on why divorce payment requirements legally flawed.
Fuck me, he's still going on about legal argument. It is irrelevant. Which court will you take it to? When will you do it?
Taking legal arguments to a political negotiation is like taking a pencil to a gunfight.
Any chance of moving to continuous negotiations? DD: We stand ready to do anything to speed up process. But Commission is very "stiff".
It's almost like the talks are controlled by our negotiating partner in precisely the way DD's critics warned him of last year.
MPs' questions seem much more sophisticated than they were last year.
David Jones, like an extra in the Addams Family, says A50 specifically mentions future relations so Barnier refusal is against that treaty.
Anyway, he's wrong. the language is sufficiently loose for Barnier to do what he likes. DD, laughably, says he knows but they signed up "in
order to get EU citizens rights under way". Yes, David, it was because of your empathy for EU citizens.
Same empathy that led you to refuse to guarantee their rights before negotiation.
The sheer extent of their irresponsibility and hypocrisy. Fuck me sideways.
Kate Hoey, monstrous mediocrity that she is, says voting against repeal bill betrays the "wishes of the British people".
Another supporter of parliamentary sovereignty who wants to hand the government powers to arbitrarily overrule parliament.
Stella Creasy: Can DD confirm that Brits will be able to book their European holiday for next year?
DD: "One duty you do have towards your constituents is not to start scare stories." A slur, of course. Creasy is right.
Without Open Skies deal, there's no guarantee there. Project Fear is what they call the prologue to objective reality.
Caroline Lucas demands the publication of the impact statements on Brexit. More info on that here politics.co.uk/comment-analys…
DD suggests that they can't publish because it would help other side. This is standard objection to Brexit FoIs. It's nonsense.
Although it has advantage of humour. "We can't let them see the extent to which we're blowing our own head off! It'll reduce our leverage!"
Julian Lewis: This avo shows opposition believes any agreement at all is better than a clean break.
Not sure why I tweeted that. It's so staggeringly stupid. Might as well report on the sounds children make when they hit each other.
Outside of Clarke, haven't heard any criticism from Tory benches, not even from Soubry. Bodes v.badly for votes on transition/repeal bill.
If anyone spots a Tory with a functioning human spine, let me know.
Simon Clark says Labour guilty of "betrayal" for wanting transition in SM/CU. Just like last year, dangerous language.
Over and over again, Tory MPs standing up to attack Labour position on the basis that it approached something akin to sanity.
Kelvin Hopkins (LAb) says it's possible to love Europe and hate the EU. So unspeakably tedious.
He made same point when I debated him last week. This is clearly the best contribution he has to make
Shailesh Vala congratulates DD for "standing up for the British people".
Whole tone of debate - betrayal, will of the people, etc - drenched in nationalist dogshit.
John Bercow has a tan and a very modern haircut and is looking quite dashing.
DD asked what EU reaction is to aim of having exact same benefits outside SM as inside it. DD says he makes no apologies for being ambitious
Someone needs to tell DD the difference between ambition and lunacy. If I try to eat my way to an athletic physique, that's not ambitious.
That's being a fucking numpty.
Phillip Hollobone says Labour swallowed EU line & displaying loss of nerve. Then attacks - yep - Remoaners. DD finds this all terribly funny
Again, the taint of nationalist hysteria all over those kinds of statements - the us vs them mentality, the obsession with betrayal, the
prioritising of emotion and identity over reason.
Nothing of any consequence being said.
Still nothing. Tory MPs there to attack Labour along set lines, then leave. benches largely empty now.
But must be said that Labour questions haven't been spectacular either. Better than before, but still hardly up to the occasion.
The Brexit lies are falling apart in the white heat of negotiations & the Labour benches, though improved, still seem hesitant and nervous.
That should have been a torturous session for DD. Instead, he mostly bluffed his way through. But hey, at least Labour is improved.
Absolutely nothing from Tory benches outside of Ken Clarke. Nothing at all.
Anyway, that's all over now. Session ended. More fun tomorrow with the repeal bill.
If you need more details on precisely how Brexit is going to fuck you and the country, get my book amazon.co.uk/dp/B01M74JXK5/…
