We *know* that there will be a vote on Coronavirus Tier system on Tue 1 Dec, with the system to come into force from the end of 2 Dec
There *might* be a Brexit Deal at the start of next week as well, and Johnson having to OK it or not
2/12
Next week is shaping up to be one hell of a week in 🇬🇧 politics
It all revolves around parliamentary sovereignty, Tory party shenanigans, and Johnson's need to survive and if that contradicts with doing the right thing
Bear with me - this is messy but important
1/12
We *know* that there will be a vote on Coronavirus Tier system on Tue 1 Dec, with the system to come into force from the end of 2 Dec
There *might* be a Brexit Deal at the start of next week as well, and Johnson having to OK it or not
2/12
I am not well placed to judge whether the Tier system is right (don't @ - reply me about that), but it's enough to say there are 3 grounds for critique
- do lockdowns work?
- does THIS lockdown system work?
- has my town/region been harshly treated?
3/12
Labour could easily justify voting against in that some of the judgments on Tiers are not strictly based on the science
But what does voting *against* mean?
4/12
5/12
https://t.co/Djlx8oQH5r
Yes they could table new regulations and could use the emergency procedure so that parliament doesn't have to vote on them until 4 weeks later. So the govt has a lot of leeway (legally if not politically)
— Adam Wagner (@AdamWagner1) November 27, 2020
But that makes Tuesday's vote - above all - an opportunity to give Johnson a bloody nose. It's a free hit
6/12
In the middle of a very political & symbolic fight over Corona restrictions. And like on Corona, Tory backbench power to stop a Deal happening is low - not least because Labour will abstain or even back a Deal. The damage is political.
7/12
8/12
If Johnson were to cede to backbenchers on Corona now - e.g. loosening or reallocating Tiers - Labour wallops him for being anti-science. Not handy.
9/12
Ceding on Corona might help him get more backing for a Brexit Deal.
10/12
But getting his Corona Tiers approved, *and* getting a Deal acceptable to the Tory backbenches, is going to leave Johnson looking politically heavily battered.
11/12
It's not a simple choice!
12/12
This does not change the essence of my argument here though!
Interesting -- you say "come into force from the end of 2 Dec", though the official guidance says "The new rules will come into effect from the beginning of Wednesday 2 December" (less than 28 days since they started "from 00:01 on Thursday 5 November"!) https://t.co/A56qt7rYVt
— Matt Sendorek (@matt_sendorek) November 27, 2020
More from Jon Worth
To those saying that those who have got their public health advice wrong earlier in the pandemic should put up their hands and apologise... a little cautionary lesson from another sector
A short 🧵
1/
Public health is not my thing
But Brexit is
And throughout 2019 and 2020 I have been trying to make predictions as to what will happen in that story. Lives do not depend on this, only my professional reputation (marginally) does
2/12
The three series of #BrexitDiagram I made in 2019 were extraordinarily accurate
Series 1/2
https://t.co/wOSzIXxJ2M
Series 3
https://t.co/E4fKeGoa5n
Series 4
https://t.co/yRsQ8mLGj1
Each series got that stage of Brexit right
3/12
The 2020 series was nowhere near as good - at one stage I had No Deal Brexit at 78% chance in early December - and that was not what
I own this error - I was wrong
I know *why* I was wrong - I thought the European Parliament would fight more on Provisional Application, and I thought agreeing everything in a week wouldn't work. I wasn't right
The Manston crisis / borders closing changed something too
5/12
A short 🧵
1/
Public health is not my thing
But Brexit is
And throughout 2019 and 2020 I have been trying to make predictions as to what will happen in that story. Lives do not depend on this, only my professional reputation (marginally) does
2/12
The three series of #BrexitDiagram I made in 2019 were extraordinarily accurate
Series 1/2
https://t.co/wOSzIXxJ2M
Series 3
https://t.co/E4fKeGoa5n
Series 4
https://t.co/yRsQ8mLGj1
Each series got that stage of Brexit right
3/12
The 2020 series was nowhere near as good - at one stage I had No Deal Brexit at 78% chance in early December - and that was not what
I own this error - I was wrong
I know *why* I was wrong - I thought the European Parliament would fight more on Provisional Application, and I thought agreeing everything in a week wouldn't work. I wasn't right
The Manston crisis / borders closing changed something too
5/12
OK, it can be avoided no more.
This is perhaps the most complex 🧵 on #Brexit I've ever attempted. But this issue really matters.
Business, possibly even lives, depend on getting this stuff right.
It is about the complexity of Brexit delay, and what to do about it.
1/25
If negotiations had gone to plan, it would have worked thus:
1️⃣ 🇬🇧&🇪🇺 agree a Deal, politically
2️⃣ That is then turned into a legally ratifiable text
3️⃣ Both sides then ratify - on 🇪🇺 side Member States and the EP, 🇬🇧 side the Houses of Parliament
4️⃣ Deal in force 1.1.2021
2/25
The problem: we do not have 1️⃣ yet.
And with just over 16 days to go - including 🌲 - we do not have time for 2️⃣ and 3️⃣ and hence no 4️⃣.
We *might* have time for 2️⃣ - and that could prove to be significant (see tweet 7 below), but definitely not 3️⃣ on 🇪🇺 side.
3/25
*Essential* problem: by having spent so long talking (I think 🇬🇧 tactic has been to run down the clock - https://t.co/8EJZAJZHqz ) the path to a normal ratification is now ⛔️.
Now ratification becomes harder - legally, politically, practically - with every passing hour.
4/25
The most obvious stumbling block is...
🥁🥁🥁
... the European Parliament!
Parliamentary sovereignty, eh? A topic for another time.
Anyway, the EP has said it will not vote on a Brexit Deal this
This is perhaps the most complex 🧵 on #Brexit I've ever attempted. But this issue really matters.
Business, possibly even lives, depend on getting this stuff right.
It is about the complexity of Brexit delay, and what to do about it.
1/25
If negotiations had gone to plan, it would have worked thus:
1️⃣ 🇬🇧&🇪🇺 agree a Deal, politically
2️⃣ That is then turned into a legally ratifiable text
3️⃣ Both sides then ratify - on 🇪🇺 side Member States and the EP, 🇬🇧 side the Houses of Parliament
4️⃣ Deal in force 1.1.2021
2/25
The problem: we do not have 1️⃣ yet.
And with just over 16 days to go - including 🌲 - we do not have time for 2️⃣ and 3️⃣ and hence no 4️⃣.
We *might* have time for 2️⃣ - and that could prove to be significant (see tweet 7 below), but definitely not 3️⃣ on 🇪🇺 side.
3/25
*Essential* problem: by having spent so long talking (I think 🇬🇧 tactic has been to run down the clock - https://t.co/8EJZAJZHqz ) the path to a normal ratification is now ⛔️.
Now ratification becomes harder - legally, politically, practically - with every passing hour.
4/25
The most obvious stumbling block is...
🥁🥁🥁
... the European Parliament!
Parliamentary sovereignty, eh? A topic for another time.
Anyway, the EP has said it will not vote on a Brexit Deal this
Pretty clear again speaking to Mep's they won't countenance debating or ratifying any EU-UK trade agreement before December 31st #Brexit
— Shona Murray (@ShonaMurray_) December 15, 2020
Mep's are pretty annoyed at the very suggestion that it would be provisionally applied and the ratification would be a simple rubber stamp.
More from Politics
THREAD
1)
@SidneyPowell1 reflects on #Iran’s meddling in the U.S. in a recent tweet to U.S. President Donald Trump.
This thread focuses on Iran’s dangerous influence in the U.S., especially through its DC-based lobby group
2)
Why is this important?
@DNI_Ratcliffe "told CBS News that there was foreign election interference by China, #Iran & Russia in November of this year [2020]."
All Americans should be informed about how Iran & its lobby group NIAC are meddling in the
3)
#Iran has been increasingly aiming to interfere in U.S. elections specifically through NIAC.
DNI John Ratcliffe had previously shed light on this vital
4)
NIAC is a lobby group in the U.S. pushing Iran’s talking points.
Listen to this Iranian regime insider explain that NIAC was established by @JZarif, the foreign minister of
5)
@tparsi is the official founder of NIAC in the U.S.
Listen to how Trita Parsi parrots Zarif’s talking
1)
@SidneyPowell1 reflects on #Iran’s meddling in the U.S. in a recent tweet to U.S. President Donald Trump.
This thread focuses on Iran’s dangerous influence in the U.S., especially through its DC-based lobby group
Dear @realDonaldTrump
— Sidney Powell \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8\u2b50\u2b50\u2b50 (@SidneyPowell1) December 23, 2020
#China and #Iran stole this election from the #American people
who voted for you in a world-record landslide!
We must expose all the corruption and restore the Republic now
There will never be a free and fair election if we don\u2019t end the rigging now \U0001f1fa\U0001f1f8 pic.twitter.com/2t707xN0ar
2)
Why is this important?
@DNI_Ratcliffe "told CBS News that there was foreign election interference by China, #Iran & Russia in November of this year [2020]."
All Americans should be informed about how Iran & its lobby group NIAC are meddling in the
3)
#Iran has been increasingly aiming to interfere in U.S. elections specifically through NIAC.
DNI John Ratcliffe had previously shed light on this vital
4)
NIAC is a lobby group in the U.S. pushing Iran’s talking points.
Listen to this Iranian regime insider explain that NIAC was established by @JZarif, the foreign minister of
5)
@tparsi is the official founder of NIAC in the U.S.
Listen to how Trita Parsi parrots Zarif’s talking
Ruben Verastigui is (allegedly) a horrifying pedo monster and has been on the digital teams for the @SenateGOP, National @GOP and the Trump campaign. I didn't want to talk about him, but I think it's important.
The allegations against RV are among the most horrifying I have read. It involves possessing and sharing images of rape of infants and plans to take action in the real world of that nature. I don't really recommend reading the details, but they are here.
These allegations were first brought to light by @jaredlholt who has an excellent thread. He warns people that they may want to avoid the end of the thread because it includes shots of the specific allegations. I make the same warning.
RV was a main stage speaker at the 2013 March For Life.
RV did a headshot for Ronna McDaniel, GOP Chairwoman
The allegations against RV are among the most horrifying I have read. It involves possessing and sharing images of rape of infants and plans to take action in the real world of that nature. I don't really recommend reading the details, but they are here.
These allegations were first brought to light by @jaredlholt who has an excellent thread. He warns people that they may want to avoid the end of the thread because it includes shots of the specific allegations. I make the same warning.
NEW: D.C. Police arrested Ruben Verastigui -- a former "senior digital strategist" for the Senate Republican Conference -- on charges of distribution of child pornography resulting from a time span that allegedly included his time at the SRC. How I confirmed ID in thread (1/?) pic.twitter.com/AcZ7c2sBKb
— Jared Holt (@jaredlholt) February 6, 2021
RV was a main stage speaker at the 2013 March For Life.
RV did a headshot for Ronna McDaniel, GOP Chairwoman
You May Also Like
I just finished Eric Adler's The Battle of the Classics, and wanted to say something about Joel Christiansen's review linked below. I am not sure what motivates the review (I speculate a bit below), but it gives a very misleading impression of the book. 1/x
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
As someone\u2019s who\u2019s read the book, this review strikes me as tremendously unfair. It mostly faults Adler for not writing the book the reviewer wishes he had! https://t.co/pqpt5Ziivj
— Teresa M. Bejan (@tmbejan) January 12, 2021
The meat of the criticism is that the history Adler gives is insufficiently critical. Adler describes a few figures who had a great influence on how the modern US university was formed. It's certainly critical: it focuses on the social Darwinism of these figures. 2/x
Other insinuations and suggestions in the review seem wildly off the mark, distorted, or inappropriate-- for example, that the book is clickbaity (it is scholarly) or conservative (hardly) or connected to the events at the Capitol (give me a break). 3/x
The core question: in what sense is classics inherently racist? Classics is old. On Adler's account, it begins in ancient Rome and is revived in the Renaissance. Slavery (Christiansen's primary concern) is also very old. Let's say classics is an education for slaveowners. 4/x
It's worth remembering that literacy itself is elite throughout most of this history. Literacy is, then, also the education of slaveowners. We can honor oral and musical traditions without denying that literacy is, generally, good. 5/x
