Afternoon summary
- Boris Johnson has blamed those MPs trying to stop a no-deal Brexit for the EU’s refusal to compromise on the backstop. But he has also claimed that, despite the EU’s response to his proposal for an alternative to the backstop being “a bit negative”, he thinks a deal will be achieved in the end. (See 5.45pm and 6.02pm.)
That’s all from me for tonight.
Thanks for the comments.
Boris Johnson says he thinks he will get Brexit deal and promises to use 'a lot of oomph' to achieve it
Here is another extract from Boris Johnson’s clip for Sky News. Johnson said that in his meetings with Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron later this week, and at the G7, he would be saying that the backstop would have to go. He said that the UK was not going to have checks at the border in Northern Ireland in any circumstances, and that that it was “a bit odd” that it was the EU who thought that checks might be necessary. And he insisted that alternatives to the backstop could be negotiated in the future talks on a long-term trade deal.
Then he went on:
You know what. At the moment it is absolutely true that our friends and partners are a bit negative. I saw what Donald Tusk had to say, and it wasn’t redolent of a sense of optimism. But I think, actually, we will get there. I think there’s a real sense now that something needs to be done with this backstop. We can’t get it through parliament as it is. So I’m going to go at it with a lot of oomph, as you would expect, and I hope we will be making some progress in the course of the next few weeks.
Boris Johnson blames MPs trying to block no-deal Brexit for EU's refusal to compromise on backstop
Boris Johnson has recorded a clip for broadcasters, and in it he has effectively blamed those MPs trying to stop a no-deal Brexit for the fact that the EU is refusing to compromise on the backstop. Here is an extract from the clip broadcast by Sky News. Johnson said:
One thing that slightly, I think, complicates the picture is that our EU friends still clearly think that there is a possibility that parliament will block Brexit. And as long as they think there’s a possibility that parliament will block Brexit they are unlikely to be minded to make the concessions that we need. So it is going to take a bit of patience.
Sturgeon says there is no place for anti-English sentiment in Scotland or in SNP
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has told an audience at the Edinburgh Festival Fringe that there is “no place in Scotland” for anti-English sentiment, insisting that the “civic nationalism” of the SNP was “on another spectrum altogether” from “far right, racist, insular movements” seen in other parts of the world.
Asked by comedian Matt Forde about Scottish nationalism, Sturgeon said:
A lot of the regimes called nationalist today are not countries striving to be independent, because often they already are, but are based on some kind of racial exceptionalism or superiority - often very illiberal and oppressive of minorities. And Scottish independence is not just at the other end of the spectrum of that, but on another spectrum altogether.
Questioned specifically about a protester who has been pictured on the Royal Mile with a ‘England get out of Scotland’ banner, Sturgeon said:
The person with that banner does not speak for the SNP. That kind of sentiment has no place in Scotland. You can’t get to a situation in any party where you say we’ll never attract the wrong kind of person but you can be absolutely vehement and resolute about calling it out. The people who put up that banner, I don’t want them in the SNP.
Sturgeon also made reference to the online reaction to comments made by the Scottish national poet Jackie Kay over the weekend about Scotland’s relationship with race. She said:
At the heart of what she was saying was that for all the progress we have made, Scotland still has a lot of work to do on tackling racism and equality. She got a lot of criticism online from people who would not accept that there’s anything wrong with Scotland and frankly we should never be complacent about racism or bigotry.
Sturgeon was also challenged about the behaviour of independence supporters online, but said that there was “an unrealistic expectation given social media and the way people operate online that any leader of any party can police that completely”.
To laughter from the audience, she added:
I’m not responsible for everything people say on Twitter, thank God! It cuts both ways. Some, which I try not to look at, of the abuse I get would literally make your hair curl, it’s horrible, misogynist, filthy, disgusting and women across all parties get that. There’s a much bigger debate, not confined to Scotland, about how social media is distorting our political debate.
Updated
Here is the Lib Dem leader, Jo Swinson, on Boris Johnson’s letter to Donald Tusk.
Boris is making demands he knows the EU will turn down so he can blame them for no-deal Brexit. He’s set his sights on crashing us out without a deal, and we have to stop him. https://t.co/3twyHD4g1m
— Jo Swinson (@joswinson) August 20, 2019
Updated
EU 'ready to find solution' to backstop problem, says Merkel
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, said the EU was ready to find a solution to the backstop issue during a visit to Iceland today. According to Reuters, she said:
The moment we have a practical arrangement on how to preserve the Good Friday agreement and at the same time define the borders of the [European Union’s] internal market, we would not need the backstop anymore.
This means we would naturally think about practical solutions. And I’ve always said that when one has the will to find these solutions, one can do so in a short period of time. The EU is ready to find a solution.
According to Reuters, Merkel said this would not require the withdrawal agreement to be re-opened and was instead a question for the so-called political declaration on future relations.
On the World at One Sir Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP chief whip, claimed that the backstop would be contrary to the Good Friday agreement. He explained:
The reality is that for unionists the Good Friday agreement was an agreement between Unionists and nationalists, and there isn’t unionist consent for the backstop, and therefore there is no cross-community consensus on this proposal and that breaches the principles of the GFA.
In his letter to Donald Tusk, Boris Johnson also made a similar argument. He said:
It has become increasingly clear that the backstop risks weakening the delicate balance embodied in the Belfast (Good Friday) agreement.
The historic compromise in Northern Ireland is based upon a carefully negotiated balance between both traditions in Northern Ireland, grounded in agreement, consent, and respect for minority rights.
While I appreciate the laudable intentions with which the backstop was designed, by removing control of such large areas of the commercial and economic life of Northern Ireland to an external body over which the people of Northern Ireland have no democratic control, this balance risks being undermined.
The Belfast (Good Friday) agreement neither depends upon nor requires a particular customs or regulatory regime. The broader commitments in the agreement, including to parity of esteem, partnership, democracy, and to peaceful means of resolving differences, can best be met if we explore solutions other than the backstop.
This is a relatively novel argument from Johnson against the backstop, although some unionists have been making it for a while. It also contradicts the more conventional view (shared by everyone from Theresa May to Sinn Fein) which is that the backstop would help to maintain the Good Friday agreement.
The GFA sought to stop Northern Ireland being contested territory by, among other provisions, allowing anyone born there to hold British citizenship, Irish citizenship, or both, and having an open border has been seen as an important enabling factor that helps to make fluid citizenship possible. May’s government and the EU agreed the backstop because they thought that, without it, border controls would reappear, and territorial disputes would follow.
Unionism does not support backstop, says DUP leader Arlene Foster
Arlene Foster found herself channelling Mandy Rice-Davies (an unlikely heroine for the DUP leader) when she was interviewed on BBC Radio Ulster earlier. Asked about Leo Varadkar, the taoiseach, saying the backstop would have to be maintained, she said:
I am not surprised by the taoiseach’s reaction. I am almost tempted to say ‘He would say that, wouldn’t he?’
But I think the letter that the prime minister has sent to President Tusk explains very clearly why the backstop cannot be entered into.
Apart from, of course, the simple political reality that it has been rejected three times by the House of Commons, it is anti-democratic, it is inconsistent with the sovereignty of the United Kingdom, and, of course, it risks weakening the delicate balance, as is pointed out in the letter, between the parties to the Belfast [Good Friday] agreement.
I think that’s very important because, of course, the Belfast agreement has been used to justify the backstop but, as the prime minister points out, it doesn’t have the support of ourselves - political unionism as we are so-called.
I mean, when you look across unionism, we are all against the backstop so that should concern the Dublin government, because if the Dublin government is genuine and values the Belfast agreement they should be very concerned that unionism does not support the backstop.
Updated
More on the decision by the UK to stop sending ministers and officials to some EU meetings from September. (See 3pm.)
From my colleague Jennifer Rankin in Brussels
Important detail on UK withdrawal from EU meetings, contained in official letter announcing the move.
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) August 20, 2019
UK has given its vote to Finland (current EU presidency holder) meaning its absence shouldn't block EU decisions.
In other words - give up control. pic.twitter.com/7I69nMd1OP
From Nicolai von Ondarza, from the German thinktank SWP
Note: This British 'empty chair' policy makes only sense if the UK leaves with no deal.
— Nicolai von Ondarza (@NvOndarza) August 20, 2019
If there is an orderly #Brexit with Withdrawal Agreement, UK would still be bound to EU laws during transition and thus want to influence EU decision-making until the last moment. https://t.co/KeP3z0M5UU
From the Sun’s Nick Gutteridge
German leader Angela Merkel, speaking in Iceland, says that 'on the backstop issue, this is a question of the Political Declaration on future ties, not of the Withdrawal Agreement'. There is 'no need to reopen the Brexit deal for a practical solution'. Via Reuters and Bloomberg.
— Nick Gutteridge (@nick_gutteridge) August 20, 2019
Corbyn says ending free movement immediately after 31 October could lead to 'Windrush on steroids'
Jeremy Corbyn has been discussing Brexit today with people running small businesses in Stevenage. Here are the key points he made when he spoke to the media.
- Corbyn criticised Boris Johnson for threatening a no-deal Brexit on 31 October. He said:
I have just spent the morning with a group of innovative small businesses here in Stevenage, all of whom do significant amounts of trade with the European Union. Some, themselves, are European Union nationals.
They want us to continue to trade with Europe, and they are appalled at the idea of a no-deal Brexit, and I think the Prime Minister should go and talk to them.
He needs to recognise that just holding the threat of a no-deal Brexit on October 31 towards the European Union isn’t going to bring about a change, it’s going to make things much worse.
He created this arbitrary date by his behaviour during the Tory leadership campaign. He needs to wise up and stop the nonsense with October 31 and start talking seriously.
- He said the government plan to end freedom of movement immediately after 31 October under a no-deal Brexit would lead to a scandal that would amount to “Windrush on steroids”. He explained:
Priti Patel has announced that freedom of movement here in every form will end on October 31. It is an utterly ludicrous position she has adopted.
Does that mean that a European Union national living in this country, possibly as a doctor, a nurse, a trauma surgeon, all kinds of things, goes home to see their family in Germany or Czech Republic or wherever else, they are not allowed back into this country? Is this another Windrush, on steroids? It is a ludicrous proposal.
We rely on a lot of European nationals to maintain our industries, maintain our education services.
I’d just say to Priti Patel, cut the nonsense, and don’t impose this again.
Ministers and officials to stop attending some EU meetings from September, Barclay says
The Brexit department has just announced that British ministers and officials will stop attending some EU meetings from Sunday 1 September (or in practice Monday 2 September - the EU does not schedule a lot of meetings on Sundays). Here’s an extract from the news release.
The government has decided this week that from 1 September, UK officials and ministers will now only attend EU meetings where the UK has a significant national interest in the outcome of discussions, such as on security.
This decision reflects the fact that the UK’s exit from the EU on 31 October is now very close and many of the discussions in EU meetings will be about the future of the Union after the UK has left.
As the PM has promised in the House of Commons in July, as a departing member state it makes sense to ‘unshackle’ officials from these EU meetings to enable them to better focus their talents on our immediate national priorities. This includes, as the top priority, work on preparations for Brexit on 31 October and on our future relationship with the EU, but also on pioneering new trade deals and promoting a truly global Britain.
This decision is not intended in any way to frustrate the functioning of the EU. The UK’s vote will be delegated in a way that does not obstruct the ongoing business of the remaining 27 EU members.
Where matters of ongoing national interest are being discussed, the UK will continue to be present until 31 October.
The department says decisions about which meetings ministers and officials attend will be made on a case by case basis. But Boris Johnson will definitely continue to attend European council, the meeting of EU leaders (although only one is scheduled between now and the end of October).
In a statement Stephen Barclay, the Brexit secretary, said:
An incredible amount of time and effort goes into EU meetings with attendance just the tip of the iceberg. Our diligent, world-class officials also spend many hours preparing for them whether in reading the necessary papers or working on briefings.
From now on we will only go to the meetings that really matter, reducing attendance by over half and saving hundreds of hours. This will free up time for ministers and their officials to get on with preparing for our departure on October 31 and seizing the opportunities that lie ahead.
No 10 tells Tusk there is 'no prospect of deal' unless withdrawal agreement reopened
I’m back, and No 10 has responded to Donald Tusk’s statement rejecting Boris Johnson’s proposal for the backstop. A Downing Street spokesman said:
We are deeply invested in the peace, prosperity and security of Northern Ireland and always will be and we have been clear that we will never place infrastructure, checks, or controls at the border.
But it is clear that unless the withdrawal agreement is reopened and the backstop abolished there is no prospect of a deal. It has already been rejected three times by MPs and is simply unviable as a solution, as the PM’s letter makes clear.
We are ready to negotiate, in good faith, an alternative to the backstop, with provisions to ensure that the Irish border issues are dealt with where they should always have been: in the negotiations on the future agreement between the UK and the EU.
Updated
The latest from Boris Johnson, which does not exactly move things on:
The referendum result must be respected.
— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) August 20, 2019
We will leave the EU on 31st October. #LeaveOct31
Lunchtime summary
- Abbott has suggested that Jeremy Corbyn could not stay neutral in any future referendum on Brexit. (See 10.26am.)
I’m off for a bit to an important executive meeting (aka, a lunch). I’ll be back after 2pm. In the meantime, a colleague will pick up the blog if there is any breaking news.
Updated
Sinn Fein accuses Boris Johnson of 'rank hypocrisy' over peace process
Echoing the comment made by the Welsh first minister, Mark Drakeford (see 11.54am), the Sinn Fein leader in Northern Ireland, Michelle O’Neill, has accused Boris Johnson of “rank hypocrisy” over the peace process. In a statement she said:
It is rank hypocrisy for Boris Johnson to claim to be acting in the interests of the peace process claiming it will be damaged by the backstop.
In reality it is Boris Johnson’s reckless pursuit of a no-deal Brexit that is threatening to undermine the peace process.
Brexit is incompatible with the Good Friday agreement and the Tories have shown a total and callous disregard to that agreement and to the democratically expressed wishes of the people of the north.
The fact is that the British government has agreed to the backstop and Boris Johnson has voted for it himself.
The EU have made it clear that the backstop is integral to the withdrawal agreement and it is necessary to avoid any hardening of the border. It is high time the Tories realised that too.
Updated
The DUP has issued a statement backing the stance on the backstop taken by Boris Johnson in his letter to Donald Tusk. Here’s an extract.
We have been strongly highlighting the fact that unionism in Northern Ireland does not support the backstop. None of the main unionist parties and groupings support the backstop. If Europe and the Republic of Ireland are serious about ensuring and recognising that progress in Northern Ireland is founded on support from both major traditions then it will have to face the reality that the backstop is not the way forward.
The DUP wants to see a negotiated and orderly exit from the European Union based on no hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic and no internal barriers to trade within the United Kingdom. The backstop has at its very heart an anti-democratic foundation where neither political representatives in London nor Belfast could change, or influence, rules made in Brussels to which Northern Ireland would be subjected.
Those on all sides who genuinely want to see a deal will recognise that the backstop previously devised does not provide the basis for agreement.
It may be the case that unionists in Northern Ireland reject the backstop, but a recent poll found that 58% of people in the region say they would prefer Northern Ireland, but not Great Britain, to remain aligned to the EU. This was the original backstop proposal made by the EU that was rejected by the DUP and the Conservative party because it would effectively put a regulatory border down the Irish Sea.
Here is a round-up of assorted comment from journalists and specialists on the Boris Johnson letter to Donald Tusk.
From Philip Oltermann, the Guardian’s Berlin correspondent.
If you wanted to remind EU leaders of the need for an instrument as binding as the backstop, reneging on your predecessor’s assurances on citizens’ rights seems a pretty good way to go about it.
— Philip Oltermann (@philipoltermann) August 20, 2019
From Simon Fraser, a former head of the Foreign Office.
It’s hard to imagine there are new solutions for the Irish border that were not explored in depth during many months of negotiation. The Johnson letter contains none. UK govt in effect asking EU to drop the backstop with no clear alternative in view.
— Simon Fraser (@SimonFraser00) August 20, 2019
A Twitter thread, starting here, from Kevin O’Rourke, a professor of economic history and author of a good book on Brexit.
The essence of cakeism. The UK will adopt its own rules, or maybe US ones, regarding goods, labour, environment, etc. So things will be sold there that may not be legal in the EU, and produced in ways that would give UK producers an unfair advantage.https://t.co/dl28Qdaibb
— Kevin Hjortshøj O'Rourke (@kevinhorourke) August 20, 2019
A Twitter thread, starting here, from Peter Foster, the Telegraph’s Europe editor.
Am stunned off my sun lounger by this @BorisJohnson letter to @eucopresident on the irish backstop. It’s based on a big fat fallacy - that the Irish border issue can be fixed by unilateral commitments or good intentions 1/quick threadhttps://t.co/X3zzO4U1d6 pic.twitter.com/TegIJPjvrn
— Peter Foster (@pmdfoster) August 19, 2019
From Mujtaba Rahman, the Brexit expert at the Eurasia consultancy.
So letter was expected, as I tweeted yesterday. Agree with @pmdfoster that @BorisJohnson alternative to backstop is very vague & won’t fly with the EU. Inflexible. So breakthrough unlikely in Berlin, Paris & Biarritz. Both sides waiting for two week Commons sitting in Sept 1/2 https://t.co/ry2MUNCRk9
— Mujtaba Rahman (@Mij_Europe) August 19, 2019
So @BorisJohnson allies are suggesting that @eucopresident letter is a genuine attempt to start negotiations but also warning that EU will be on wrong side of public opinion if it rejects PM’s proposal outright. More evidence of Johnson playing blame game 1/2
— Mujtaba Rahman (@Mij_Europe) August 20, 2019
But it poses dilemma for EU. Letter might be Johnson’s opening rather than final position depending upon EU's response in bilaterals & Biarritz. As always, @BorisJohnson more optimistic about prospects of deal than some aides ENDS
— Mujtaba Rahman (@Mij_Europe) August 20, 2019
From the Financial Times editor Lionel Barber.
The chutzpah is Boris Johnson suggesting that the backstop puts the Good Friday Agreement at risk. Precisely the opposite given the threat of a return of a hard border. People who pointed this out after Brexit referendum were shouted down https://t.co/RxJ6uBMSkU
— Lionel Barber (@lionelbarber) August 20, 2019
Updated
Earlier I suggested that Boris Johnson’s letter to Donald Tusk could be seen as just an elaborate exercise in attempted blame deflection. (See 9.25am.) This quote makes that interpretation look increasingly plausible.
Senior figure in U.K. government on @eucopresident tweet: “[This] looks like an over re-action from Tusk. It appears their position is nothing will change from the unworkable deal offered to Theresa May. Sad they are unwilling to be reasonable.”
— Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) August 20, 2019
Judging by the use of the word “sad”, government sources are starting to take their inspiration from Donald Trump.
These are from the BBC’s Adam Fleming in Brussels.
EU27 diplomats have received a document from the Council and Commission describing claims made by @BorisJohnson in his #Brexit letter as “misleading” and “incorrect.” (1)
— Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) August 20, 2019
The doc says:
— Adam Fleming (@adamfleming) August 20, 2019
- the backstop is compatible with the Good Friday Agreement
- people in Nothern Ireland would have a say
- separate legal orders in Ireland and N Ireland can only coexist thanks to framework of EU law. (2)
Welsh first minister accuses Boris Johnson of 'hypocrisy of highest degree' over Brexit
These are from Mark Drakeford, the Labour first minister of Wales, on Boris Johnson’s offer to the EU on the backstop.
No-one should be fooled: this is not a serious effort to find a solution to the crisis which threatens to overwhelm us but an attempt to scapegoat the EU.https://t.co/uT42JAF2Sk
— Mark Drakeford (@fmwales) August 20, 2019
The EU has repeatedly refused to reopen negotiations on the Northern Ireland backstop, which was painstakingly hammered out with Theresa May and which is unacceptable not to a majority in Parliament but to the hardline eurosceptics who form the Government.
— Mark Drakeford (@fmwales) August 20, 2019
The Prime Minister says the Northern Ireland backstop is anti-democratic yet he has no democratic mandate for taking the UK out of the EU without a deal. This is hypocrisy of the highest degree.
— Mark Drakeford (@fmwales) August 20, 2019
EU says Boris Johnson's backstop proposal would not ensure no return to hard border in Ireland
Here is the full quote from the European commission’s spokeswoman, Natasha Bertaud, on Boris Johnson’s backstop proposal. She said:
We welcome the UK government’s engagement and continued commitment to an orderly withdrawal. We firmly believe this is in the best interests of both the EU and the UK.
However, we also note that the letter does not provide a legal operational solution to prevent the return of a hard border on the island of Ireland.
It does not set out what any alternative arrangements could be and in fact it recognises that there is no guarantee that such arrangements will be in place by the end of the transitional period.
Otherwise, as we have said on many occasions, we do stand ready to work constructively with the UK and within our mandate.
These are from my colleague Jennifer Rankin in Brussels.
Commission spokeswoman: "President Tusk has just tweeted his initial reaction, a reaction that we share."
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) August 20, 2019
Very co-ordinated response from EU institutions. https://t.co/UCThk5NXD9
European commission spokeswoman:
— Jennifer Rankin (@JenniferMerode) August 20, 2019
"It’s Brexit that creates unique difficulties for the island of Ireland... The backstop is the only means identified by both parties to honour this commitment [ of avoiding a hard border]."
European council president rejects Johnson's backstop proposal
Donald Tusk, the president of the European council, has given his first response to the letter he received from Boris Johnson yesterday. He seems to be rejecting Johnson’s proposal for an alternative to the backstop.
The backstop is an insurance to avoid a hard border on the island of Ireland unless and until an alternative is found. Those against the backstop and not proposing realistic alternatives in fact support reestablishing a border. Even if they do not admit it.
— Donald Tusk (@eucopresident) August 20, 2019
Updated
Tory chair James Cleverly claims EU bound to cooperate on intelligence-sharing in event of no-deal Brexit
In an interview on the Today programme James Cleverly, the Conservative party chairman, was asked about the point raised by Diane Abbott (see 10.26am) - the impact of a no-deal Brexit on criminal justice cooperation with the EU.
Asked if Britain had had assurances from the EU that policing, intelligence and counter-terrorism sharing would continue in the event of a no-deal Brexit, Cleverly was unable to give a firm yes. Instead he replied:
The EU are sensible pragmatic people and it would be in no-one’s interest to reduce the amount of intelligence sharing and co-operation that we do.
It’s not in their interest, it’s not in our interest, these are smart, sensible and pragmatic people and it is unrealistic to think that they would hamper their own safety or attempt to hamper ours, it’s ridiculous.
To those of you have have followed the Brexit debate closely after the last three years, this is a surprise return of the argument that used to be associated with BMW manufacturers and prosecco producers – that the UK and the EU were bound to agree a free trade deal because that would be in both sides’ interests. And it would be. But the history of the Brexit negotiation that mutual self-interest is not, on its own, enough to secure a deal.
Updated
Diane Abbott suggests Corbyn could not stay neutral in any future referendum on Brexit
Diane Abbott, the shadow home secretary, had the 8.10 slot on the Today programme this morning. Here are the key points from her interview.
- Abbott said government plans to end freedom of movement for EU citizens immediately after a no-deal Brexit would “create chaos” and “make Windrush look like a minor blip”. She explained:
I think it’s going to create chaos, it’s going to be very problematic for business, but it’s going to be very difficult for EU nationals.
There are currently 3 million here altogether, a million have registered for settled status, there’s no possibility of 2 million registering between now and the 31st October, and then those EU nationals that were here but haven’t registered for settled status will be in the exact same position as the Windrush people.
There will be people that came here perfectly legally, but will not have the paperwork to prove that and will have all sorts of problems with employers and the NHS and so on ...
The way Boris [Johnson] is doing it is heading to a catastrophe [which] will make Windrush look like a minor blip.
- She dismissed the government’s claim that it could tighten criminal record checks on EU nationals wanting to enter the UK immediately after a no-deal Brexit. She said she did not see how criminality could be checked once access to EU databases was lost. She went on:
The truth is one of the problems about leaving the EU without a deal is we will lose access to all the EU databases that the police and the security services have relied on and we will lose it on the stroke of the end of the day on October 31st.
- She suggested that it would not be right for Jeremy Corbyn to stay neutral in any future referendum on Brexit. Yesterday Corbyn refused to commit to backing remain in any referendum held after a general election, with a credible leave option also on the ballot, and he and John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, both suggested that in such a referendum Labour could remain neutral, with members free to campaign for either side. Asked about this, Abbott said Corbyn was trying to keep both wings of the party together. When Today’s Justin Webb asked if it would be feasible for Corbyn to remain neutral in such a contest, she replied:
Jeremy is the leader of the Labour party, as Jo Swinson needs to remember, and he can’t stay to one side on an issue such as this, but what he can do is try and bring both wings of the Labour movement together.
Listening to the exchange, it was clear that what Abbott meant by “can’t stay to one side” was “can’t stay on the sidelines”, not “can’t take one side”. But when Webb pressed her again on this, asking her if she was saying Corbyn would have to campaign for remain, Abbott gave a more evasive answer. She replied:
I believe that Jeremy will do what he’s always done, which is do what he thinks is best for the country and best for the Labour movement.
Then, when Webb tried again to get her to clarify what she was saying, Abbott said they should be talking about the Tories instead. She finally said that Labour would have to debate this, and that Corbyn would follow what the party decided.
- She confirmed she personally would campaign for remain in any future referendum on Brexit. This is also what John McDonnell said yesterday. Abbott said that she and “John Mac”, as she called him, were “speaking as individuals”.
Updated
The Brexit party has also criticised Boris Johnson’s offer to the EU.
This is from its leader, Nigel Farage, who only three years ago was saying he would welcome a Norway-style Brexit.
Even without the backstop, this is still the worst “deal” in history. https://t.co/tzOPjYaDL9
— Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) August 19, 2019
And this is from Richard Tice, chair of the Brexit party.
Let’s be clear: the WA even without the backstop is still the worst deal in history, is not Brexit and the Brexit Party will fight it tooth and nail. This letter confirms our fears that Boris and the Tories cannot be trusted to deliver a proper Brexit. https://t.co/wfIgJYxm2H
— Richard Tice (@TiceRichard) August 19, 2019
Updated
As we report in our overnight story, EU sources were last night ruling out any renegotiation of the Brexit withdrawal agreement, including the backstop. One well-informed source told the Guardian:
There was a two and a half year negotiating process in which the EU compromised, including on the question of the backstop. The withdrawal agreement is not open for renegotiation and the backstop is not open for change. A legally operable backstop to avoid a hard border remains central to the withdrawal agreement for the EU27.
Other reporters have been getting a similar message from their EU sources.
These are from James Crisp, the Telegraph’s Brussels correspondent.
EU diplomat on Boris letter to Tusk.
— James Crisp (@JamesCrisp6) August 20, 2019
"3 years on & still this letter fails to put forward any realistic alternatives for the backstop. Hope and imagination don’t keep the border away. This letter is not request to renegotiate, it’s a clear cut attempt to avoid it all cost.
1/
"If the British government was serious it would just ask the EU to trust them. Because if they did, the EU would have to look at it; this is not a moment for thin skinned action."
— James Crisp (@JamesCrisp6) August 20, 2019
2
EU dip: "The British would put forward proposals of their own to avoid the border per the wish of majority of the people in Northern Ireland.
— James Crisp (@JamesCrisp6) August 20, 2019
In diplomacy there’s no space for hubris or pride but good intentions will not keep the border away. It doesn’t work like that"
3
Ends
This is from the Financial Times’ Sebastian Payne.
🚨 Dublin rejects Boris Johnson’s letter 🚨
— Sebastian Payne (@SebastianEPayne) August 19, 2019
"Unfortunately this letter does not set out what the so called 'alternative arrangements' could or would be. Unless and until there are viable alternatives the need for the backstop insurance policy is clear,” said a senior govt figure
And these are from Charlie Cooper’s London Playblook briefing for Politico Europe.
Reaction 1: One EU diplomat told POLITICO’s Lili Bayer: “It’s clear from the letter that renegotiation is the last thing the British government wants. Brexit started and ends with preservation of the Tory party.”
Reaction 2: A French diplomatic official tells POLITICO’s Rym Momtaz: “Replacing the backstop with something that isn’t defined gets rid of the guarantee the backstop was meant to provide. No checks, it’s a joke, it means that the U.K. would accept that products that don’t respect its rules enter its market without control? How long will that hold?” Reminder: Johnson meets Emmanuel Macron on Thursday.
Updated
Labour dismisses Johnson's backstop offer to EU as 'fantasyland wishlist'
Boris Johnson is meeting the EU’s two most powerful national leaders, Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron, later this week. Last night, ahead of those meetings, he released his first proposal since he became prime minister for how the Brexit deal might be renegotiated. It came in the form of an open letter to Donald Tusk, the outgoing European council president. You can read the four-page letter in full here (pdf). And here is our overnight story.
Here is the key extract, where Johnson proposes how the backstop might be replaced.
This government will not put in place infrastructure, checks, or controls at the border between Northern Ireland and Ireland. We would be happy to accept a legally binding commitment to this effect and hope that the EU would do likewise.
We must also respect the aim to find ‘flexible and creative’ solutions to the unique circumstances on the island of Ireland. That means that alternative ways of managing the customs and regulatory differences contingent on Brexit must be explored.
The reality is that there are already two separate legal, political, economic, and monetary jurisdictions on the island of Ireland. This system is already administered without contention and with an open border.
The UK and the EU have already agreed that ‘alternative arrangements’ can be part of the solution. Accordingly:
- I propose that the backstop should be replaced with a commitment to put in place such arrangements as far as possible before the end of the transition period, as part of the future relationship.
- I also recognise that there will need to be a degree of confidence about what would happen if these arrangements were not all fully in place at the end of that period. We are ready to look constructively and flexibly at what commitments might help, consistent of course with the principles set out in this letter.
This morning opinion is divided as to whether this is a genuine offer, that could open the door to a very unlikely but not 100% impossible compromise solution, or just an elaborate exercise in attempted blame deflection. As is often the case when trying to explain motive in politics, it is probably best to assume that both factors are in play.
But the opposition parties have been damning. Last night Labour issued this response, from the shadow Northern Ireland secretary, Tony Lloyd.
Boris Johnson seems to have forgotten that he voted for Theresa May’s deal including the backstop.
Whichever Brexit outcome he pursues, whether it’s a disastrous no deal or this fantasyland wish list, Boris Johnson clearly has no qualms about putting jobs, rights, prosperity or peace in Northern Ireland at risk.
Sir Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, posted this on Twitter.
This letter confirms that Johnson has no negotiating strategy. He suggests (unspecified) alternatives to the backstop. And if they don’t work: further (unspecified) alternatives to the backstop. Why didn’t anyone think of that before! https://t.co/AispOLuWoM
— Keir Starmer (@Keir_Starmer) August 19, 2019
And the Liberal Democrats’ Brexit spokesman, Tom Brake, put out a statement saying:
The backstop, agreed between the UK government and the EU, is there to guarantee no hard border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland.
Boris Johnson’s proposal to replace it with ‘a commitment to put in place arrangements as far as possible before the end of the transition period’ is so vague as to be deeply embarrassing.
The border issue remains intractable and Johnson’s intervention simply highlights after three years the Conservative government are no closer to identifying a credible solution.
I will be posting more reaction as the day goes on.
With parliament in recess, and much of the political class on holiday, there are only two diary items on the agenda for today.
11am: Jeremy Corbyn holds a meeting with business leaders in Hertfordshire. He is urging the government to publish the Operation Yellowhammer assessments of how disruptive a no-deal Brexit would be.
1.30pm: Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, is interviewed by Matt Forde at an Edinburgh fringe event.
As usual, I will be covering breaking political news as it happens, as well as bringing you the best reaction, comment and analysis from the web. I plan to publish a summary at about 12.30pm and another when I wrap up. Unusually, I will be taking a break over lunch, so the blog will go quiet then for a bit.
You can read all the latest Guardian politics articles here. Here is the Politico Europe roundup of this morning’s political news. And here is the PoliticsHome list of today’s top 10 must-reads.
If you want to follow me or contact me on Twitter, I’m on @AndrewSparrow.
I try to monitor the comments below the line (BTL) but it is impossible to read them all. If you have a direct question, do include “Andrew” in it somewhere and I’m more likely to find it. I do try to answer questions, and if they are of general interest, I will post the question and reply above the line (ATL), although I can’t promise to do this for everyone.
If you want to attract my attention quickly, it is probably better to use Twitter.
Updated
