Theresa May is not knowingly undersold when it comes to clunky political events. So today she travels to Grimsby (ooh, let’s choose somewhere people voted in large numbers to Leave the EU) in front of “an audience of workers” (hand-picked, not likely to really kick off in front of their bosses) to send a message to the EU (that she could really be making in, er, Brussels). That message is: “The decisions that the European Union makes over the next few days will have a big impact on the outcome of the vote” on Brexit next Tuesday. Hacks are wondering why they should travel hundreds of miles just to hear the same old guff they can hear in London, especially if the PM remains on robo-mode in the Q&A. The last time May made a Big Speech in ‘the Brexit capital of Britain’, she was in a Stoke pottery, and went down to a 230-vote defeat two days later. Let’s see if Grimsby’s workers, like Tory Brexiteer MPs, feel they’re being treated like mugs today too.
Shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer says May’s words already sound like “an admission of failure” and right now few in government are confident of winning Tuesday’s vote. Brexiteers loathe the idea of being bounced at the last minute, so thoughts are turning to what happens straight after another defeat. The Times’ Francis Elliott reports that to reduce instability the following votes on no-deal and delay could now be held on the same day, Wednesday. Remember the PM gave a guarantee that the vote on extending Article 50 would be ‘on’ Thursday, March 14, not ‘by’ then. But given that she’s torn up so many other promises to MPs, few would mind this one.
On Wednesday, we also face the prospect of May actually allowing a free vote on no-deal. I suspect she’s likely to personally vote for it, safe in the knowledge that not whipping it will lead to its overwhelming rejection. But it’s a heck of a precedent to set for a government on a such a fundamental issue of policy. Meanwhile, Cabinet Remainers are reviving the idea of a series of ‘indicative votes’ to let Parliament tell Brussels which kind of Brexit really does command that elusive ‘stable’ majority May once promised. Speaking of which, the ‘Common Market 2.0’ option won another convert last night. George Osborne told Radio 4’s The World Tonight that he backed the idea. That in itself may deter some, but could encourage the large body of middle-of-the-road Tory MPs who just want Brexit delivered.
Brexiteers are sounding very unhappy about the sequencing and choices on offer. Dominic Raab said on Question Time that the forced choice of a bad deal or no Brexit was a “kind of establishment stitch up” that would provoke “a day of reckoning with the voters”. The ERG’s Mark Francois on Newsnight didn’t sound like a guy who thought Cox’s codpiece was big enough to spare the government’s blushes: “If you come back and ask essentially the same question, logic suggests you’ll get pretty much the same answer.” And George Eustice has written a waspish ConHome piece on how the EU and Whitehall interact - and why a no-deal outcome would in fact mean a nine-month transition with ‘bumps’ along the way.
Ministers were desperate to talk about something other than Brexit yesterday. So desperate, it seems, that they then embarked on a series of gaffes to give us all something to write about. Amber Rudd’s 1950s throwback description of Diane Abbott as ’coloured’, Karen Bradley’s claim that police and army killings in Northern Ireland were ‘not crimes’and Andrea Leadsom suggesting that Islamophobia was a Foreign Office issue. All three remarks betrayed a cack-handedness and ignorance that symbolised a tired and weary government, adrift and out of touch.
Bradley’s error was particularly egregious given the paramount importance for any Northern Ireland Secretary to be acutely aware of its history. Her blunder didn’t help Brexit talks either, with Irish PM Leo Varadkar saying her remarks “were insensitive and wrong” and that it was a matter for May whether the minister could remain in post. Former NI Ombudsman Baroness O’Loan demanded Bradley’s resignation yesterday on Radio 4’s World At One, adding that the PM should sack her if she didn’t walk. O’Loan was particularly furious at Bradley’s refusal to apologise rather than just ‘correct’ her ‘inadvertent’ remarks. In an excruciating interview with BBC Northern Ireland, Bradley was finally forced to apologise. Let this quote (to the Press Association) sink in: “I want to be very clear – I do not believe what I said, that is not my view.”
As for Leadsom’s gaffe, Labour’s Naz Shah has now written to the PM to declare that her remarks “played into the idea that Muslims are less British” and “exposed a profound ignorance of race issues” at the top of government. Shah urged Leadsom to follow the lead of her cabinet colleague Rudd, who swiftly and fully apologised.
The Equalities and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) announcement yesterday that Labour may have ‘unlawfully discriminated’ against Jews was for many MPs a real badge of shame. The decision came early and thus dulled some of its impact on the evening news, but its impact should not be underestimated. At a stroke, it means that what has remained an internal party matter subject only to internal inquiries (like the Chakrabarti one) is now likely to be subject to independent scrutiny for the first time.
Tom Watson was swift to write to general secretary Jennie Formby to say that: “All relevant files and data should be retained so that investigators can form a clear picture of the processes and culture around Labour’s response to antisemitism within our ranks.” The party strongly denies any unlawful conduct, but the next steps will test that. The EHRC will send a formal letter to the party possibly today and then Labour then has 14 days to respond. If the watchdog decides the reply is insufficient, it has the power to demand that Labour produces documents, emails and other evidence, as well as request interviews from staff, past and present.
One way out of this is for Labour to propose its own reforms to its complaints processes. It could enter into a voluntary legal agreement with the regulator under section 23 of the Equalities Act in lieu of a full investigation. That’s why the role of Charlie Falconer once more becomes relevant. But his two key demands, to be allowed independent solicitors and to possibly tear up non-disclosure agreements (NDAs), look like non-starters. The NDAs are there to protect staff and not just the party. One issue that is sure to be explored is whether a statutory body like the EHRC can now go beyond NDAs.
NEC member Huda Elmi’s response was to attack the watchdog, describing it as “a failed experiment”. “We need to abolish it and bring back separate, well-resourced governmental bodies for each equality strand!” She later clarified her remarks. But while there is indeed a legitimate case for arguing that the EHRC should be split up (I remember at the time disabilities groups were not happy at being merged into a wider equalities body), raising those issues yesterday felt to many like a classic case of the ‘defend first, think later’ approach that has characterised this whole issue.
Ahead of International Women’s Day, watch Tory female MPs read out the abuse they get online.
John Bercow has used a highly controversial veto to block the Freedom of Information release of his correspondence with officials about bullying and harassment in parliament. HuffPost UK has been attempting to obtain correspondence between the Commons speaker and officials about the Dame Laura Cox inquiry into bullying in parliament, which suggested Bercow and other senior staff were part of the problem and should consider quitting. Sir Kevin Barron tells us: “This FOI provision should not be used to hide from an honest discussion about allegations of bullying.”
Head teachers are not militants. But it says something about the depth of their frustration over education cuts that more than 7,000 of them have written a joint letter to 3.5 million families, warning of worsening budget shortages. They are also furious that the education secretary Damian Hinds and schools minister Nick Gibb “snubbed” them by refusing to meet. Labour’s Angela Rayner points out many heads have been reduced to sending ‘begging letters’ to parents for funds for basics. This issue was a running sore at the last election. And it’s still festering.
COMMONS PEOPLE
Our latest CommonsPeople podcast is out. Our guest this week is Rachel Reeves, whose new book Women of Westminster is out today. We chat about Brexit, why Labour anti-semites should be banned for life and how Theresa May compares online trolls to blokes at the end of a bar. Reeves highlights all the lesser known women MPs who made a real difference to our public life over the past 100 years. Click HERE to listen on Audioboom or below for iTunes.
If you’re reading this on the web, sign-up HERE to get the WaughZone delivered to your inbox.
Got something you want to share? Please send any stories/tips/quotes/pix/plugs/gossip to Paul Waugh(paul.waugh@huffingtonpost.com), Ned Simons (ned.simons@huffingtonpost.com), Rachel Wearmouth (rachel.wearmouth@huffpost.com) and Jasmin Gray (jasmin.gray@huffpost.com) and Arj Singh (arj.singh@huffpost.com)