Thread by @IanDunt

It's fun times in Brexit land once again - David Davis in front of Lords EU committee parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/5f…

DD says outstanding areas are N.Ireland, some remaining separation issues and governance of the agreement (ie is the ECJ involved).

On N.Ireland: We stand by joint report but don't agree with their interpretation of that - "a division of the kingdom". This is a nonsense and disingenuous analysis of their position but whatever.

Been a while since I watched him do this. I forgot how weird and inconsistent I find his decision to take off his glasses.

DD: Withdrawal agreement must take into account the future trade deal - says it needs to be "pretty substantive".

DD very relaxed. And as ever looks like's recovering from brandy ingested while jogging

How do you imagine intractable disputes being resolved (this is for trade, European Arrest Warrant and civil liberties etc)?

DD: Forum will depend on where situation arises. Ie here if that's where the data is gathered.

What about a quasi court for agencies? EUratom, aviation etc?

DD says he wants to stay in Easa. Cites Swiss assoc. membership. Tested in Swiss court. Admits we'll struggle to negotiate that.

DD sounds like he might want to fight for British cits rights to free movement a little harder than he has done so far. This is key for many Brits in EU, but they were denied meetings with him and govt failed to secure it.

Annoyingly he says he did not "realise until recently" that this affected the retirement community. he would have realised earlier if he had bothered to hold a bloody meeting with the Brits affected.

Spoke volumes that govt refused to guarantee EU citizen rights in order to secure reciprocal rights for Brits in EU, but then seemed utterly uninterested when the latter group tried to tell govt what they needed.

Anyway.

DD says we "absolutely" must have ratification of trade agreement done by end of transition in Dec 2020. He has almost no chance of achieving this but when did accuracy matter in this shitballoon.

DD says Netherlands in a really weird way.

Like they are the Lands of the Nether people.

"Part of my job is to make sure each individual country is aware of its interest in Brexit." Christ. I'm so glad I cant see the meetings between DD and other countries. Be fucking mortified.

DD reminded that he is talking nonsense. He said earlier MPs would need details of trade deal cos of all the money we;re spending as part of it. He's told that money relates to current financial period, not the FTA. He instantly gives in.

He is now pressed on it - there's no way to use it as leverage, is there? DD: "We haven't yet concluded the legal text. It depends on what conditionalities are in it."

Translation: That's a no.

Why did you agree instantly to a 21 month transition instead of sticking to our argument for 24 months?

Pointless question really. If someone tried to build a space ship with 23 bricks, the fact they didn't have 40 would be immaterial.

DD says commercial interests in UK needed "certainty by March" rather than worrying about the nature of the transition. In other words: He was reaching the pre-emptory cliff edge of businesses making decisions because they'd reached the 12-month lead-in.

DD asked about customs union amendment. Told committee has head from CBI and TUB that both want it (cats sleeping with dogs, locusts from the sky etc).

DD blathers on. "Not sure which amendment to the withdrawal bill you;re talking about". Yes you are David.

"We;re going to have to resolve this matter in the Commons and the Lords as well," he admits. DD insist they have to leave cos British people were told this by both campaigns.

Fuck me backwards David that argument will make a lot more sense when we see that money for the NHS.

'No but THIS LIE we intend to keep!'

Apparently British trade policy is now defined by what Cameron said offhand on the fucking Marr programme. DD just cited it like it was gospel.

DD also presumably pursuing policy of all the German car manufacturers lining up outside Downing Street.

DD told CU is only way to stop hard border in Ireland. Emits standard-issue Leaver guff. There is already a border etc. Sigh.

Says tariffs not a problem, it;s about single market. Then, as if it;s nothing, that it;s about rules of origin.

It is a single market and country-of-origin issue. And that that is precisely the problem. Might as well the stabbing was fine apart from the problem with the knife.

'Authorised economic operators'. Drink. 'Having no tariffs'. Drink. 'Electronic notification'. Drink. 'Not too difficult'. Drink.

Guys I'm not sure DD is on top of this shit.

DD told some members of committee went to the Irish border. "We had a sense of real anxiety from business people on both sides." Did he have the same experience when he finally went last month?

DD: "There's undoubtedly nervousness. That concern is there. That's one of the things we need to deal with. But I reiterate, there is a border there at the moment."

Useless.

Bear in mind this problem exists, according to Davis, because David Cameron said something when he was on Marr.

(It'd actually exists anyway cos of SM, but CU membership deals with a lot of it. Soz, I'm in rush.)

DD describing the customs partnership like it isn't insane. "The Commission did push back. They were concerned about how you would run the new customs partnership." Heh.

He's fondling his glasses again.

Poor glasses, He looks like he has super clammy hands.

DD: "I can't imagine a circumstance in which an Irish govt would put up a hard border."

He still doesn't seem to understand how the EU works.

DD admits border posts were first port of attack during Troubles. He keeps trying to stress how often he's visited. Clearly stung by criticism of him not going at all as Brexit secretary until last month.

He's putting a lot of emphasise on intelligence led policing (you'd need something similar in customs). "There's a variety of mechanisms which don't require border infrastructure." Dear me.

The committee has been told by other countries you'd need at least a decade for a tech solution. I think this is generous. Anyway: "The committee is not convinced"

DD now referring to his position papers from last year, including the tragic Ireland one and the comedic customs one.

In last 20 years Sept11th happened. This changed border security, he says. Talks US-Canada border.

Reminder, before he goes on: Every lorry on that border is stopped.

DD buggering on about "well-tested procedures" for authorised operators etc. It is hogwash. Here is why it is hogwash. Do read so that they can't bullshit you. politics.co.uk/blogs/2018/03/…

"Virtually everyone we saw other than the DUP said they didn't know it would work without a customs union".

DD completely unaffected by any of this. Like a wall of contented whisky-soaked befuddlement.

Sorry I just made him sound much lovelier than he really is. Contented whisky-soaked befuddlement is one of my many life goals.

DD asked what full regulatory alignment is from that December agreement. DD says it was "plain that we were not talking about harmonisation". Was it though? No.

Wonder if they just played him for a fool or if he's putting it on.

It's really hard to take a screenshot of him where he looks sober.

Davis told pointedly: "It really seems to me important that when you're announcing something there is some common purpose and common agreement. Especially on Ireland."

When text said UK would maintain full alignment, did that mean whole of UK?

DD: "No. Firstly we;re not going allow differences in Irish Sea. But reference was to North-South strand."

The two things he just said cannot be put together.

He's paddling around in his own cynical ambiguity.

Hearing still ongoing. I kind of wish DD would just get up and go tbh. I want a drink and they're not going to get much from him I don't think.

DD told that no witness they've heard from would concur to his trade deal timeline.

DD says the process goes like this: Comission says UK has not put forward a plan. Then when we do they say not enough detail. Then they try to use time pressure.

Look, the Commission has many, many faults, but the explanation for that strategy is that you had no plan when you triggered a mechanism to start an impossible timetable.

Better from DD. Says we need to give EU confidence that they will not be undercut by UK and way to do that is alignment in outcome.

That mechanism is a dispute resolution system. he says this is tried and tested. What he omits is that the level of trust he is asking for only exists in EU terms with shared regulatory architecture - courts, laws etc.

Where that doesn't exist - ie equivalence - 3rd country in very weak position. EU can cut the umbilical cord whenever it likes.

You're not going to run one of the world's leading financial centres like that. You;re just not.

Well maybe these guys would. Their definition of national interest leaves a lot to be desired.

DD asked how he's going to get parliamentary backing for the withdrawal treaty.

DD: "By getting a good deal."

He's going to lose.

Sidenote: Whenever he makes a joke you realise that he is really quite boring.

It's always classic cars and spitfires and ruddy old wankstains. You know the sort.

Whenever DD complains about the Commission it's in the exact same tone that Brent used to slag off Neil behind his back.

"No you stay out of it mate, this is big boy shit."

OK we're done. That was a waste of time really, but on the plus side I will savour that first drink now much more than I might otherwise have done.

It was an example of very good and efficient chairing however - got it all done in time and thought on his feet, grouping questions together under broad topics.

I learned more about chairing than I did about Brexit, that's for fucking sure.