Politics

For 18 months, Donald Trump was amazingly useful to British politicians. Whatever their party, he provided them with the most magnificent means with which to polish their liberal credentials. In January, when the British Parliament spent three hours debating a public petition to ban Trump from entering the country, we learned from Labour’s Rupa Huq that he was ‘racist, homophobic, misogynist’, from the Conservative Marcus Fysh that he was ‘the orange prince of American self-publicity’ and from the SNP’s Gavin Newlands that he was not only ‘racist, sexist and bigoted’, but ‘an idiot’. So perhaps now that the giggling has subsided, we can get down to a more realistic assessment

Labour’s election then re-election of Jeremy Corbyn was the equivalent of a suicidal man who, when the noose snaps and gives him a second chance, decides to throw himself off a cliff instead. The Liberal Democrats are too small to get a hearing. The Scottish nationalists will speak only for Scotland. The only arguments that matter in England now are the arguments within the right. But what is the right today? What does it mean to say you are right-wing? You only have to look at the triumph of Donald Trump to guess the answer. He not only beat Hillary Clinton but the old Republican party, which looks like it

If there were any doubt that there are too many lawyers in Parliament it has been removed by the meeting, on Monday evening, between backbench Conservative MPs and the justice secretary Liz Truss. The subject was Truss’s alleged failure to defend the judiciary from criticism of last week’s High Court judgement on the enactment of Article 50. One MP was reported as saying: ‘Her job is to defend the judiciary from attack.’ No it isn’t. Liz Truss has special duties as Lord Chancellor – but she is the government’s justice secretary, not CEO of a judges’ trade association. Her duty as Lord Chancellor is to uphold the continued independence (from

David Davis tried to reassure Tory MPs that last week’s court ruling — and the forthcoming supreme court appeal — would not delay the government invoking Article 50, in a Commons statement this afternoon. The Brexit secretary re-stated Theresa May’s words that the government values the independence of the judiciary and the freedom of the press. He insisted that, despite the appeal, May still plans to trigger Article 50 by the end of March. The subsequent debate, however, made clear just how much division there is on the issue — as Davis accused those MPs demanding control over Brexit of wanting to ‘wreck the negotiation’. Anna Soubry’s call for ‘temperate’

Once upon a time, ITV was the darling of the Corbynistas. In fact, it was Mr S who disclosed that Seumas Milne — Corbyn’s director of communications — had been overheard discussing the pros of the broadcaster over the Beeb, back in January. Alas, things have since taken a turn for the worse. The problem? An ITV reporter dared to ask the Labour leader whether he would be happy if Theresa May called an early election. After Libby Wiener asked the question at a conference organised by Class, Corbyn claimed he was being ‘harassed’. Jeremy Corbyn ducks question on general election; accuses @LibbyWienerITV of 'harrassment'https://t.co/6IPEIahDbj pic.twitter.com/ZUsiTrBbRX — ITV News (@itvnews) November 5, 2016 Now Richard Burgon

The 17.4 million who voted for Britain to leave the European Union were giving advice, rather than an instruction, to Parliament. This ought not to be a controversial point. David Cameron chose to hold a consultative rather than a legally binding referendum – and was able to do this because it would be unthinkable for parliament to ignore such advice, or stand athwart the result of that referendum. All parties regarded the referendum as politically binding. All knew that, if Brexit was voted down, then parliament would be quickly dissolved and a general election called. The British constitution is unwritten, reflecting a British distaste for schematic articles of political faith. For centuries, we have got along rather well by

As a general rule, any day the government loses in court is a good day. So yesterday was an especially fine day. A delicious one, too, obviously, in as much as the fist-clenched, foot-stamping, whining of so many Brexiteers was so overblown and ludicrous it toppled into hilarity. People who shouted for months about the urgent need to restore parliamentary sovereignty now reacted in horror to the restoration of parliamentary sovereignty. ‘That’s not what we meant’, they spluttered. We meant governmental supremacy only when it suits us. Well, tough. A certain amount of squealing was only to be expected since, if Nigel Farage has taught us anything, it is that the Brexit-minded