Eu referendum

Why it’s not true that Brexit is already starting to bite

So, the Remoaners have at last got a piece of economic news they can try to crow about – the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rose last month from 0.9 per cent to 1.2 per cent, sparking a round of ‘I told you so’s’ on Twitter – one even describes it as a ‘cost of living crisis’. One suspects he wasn’t around in 1975 – incidentally the year that Britain voted to stay in what was then the Common Market – when inflation topped out 26 per cent. Except the CPI figures don’t really tell you what the Remain lobby wants to tell us at all. Remember how a few weeks

The seven ways ‘Remain’ could have won the EU referendum

Trying to write the first draft of history on the EU referendum and the leadership mess that followed had both its dramatic and its comic elements. My phone never stopped ringing with Eurosceptics keen to tell me why their contribution to a meeting that had previously escaped my notice was the decisive factor in securing victory. But when a vote is so close — 52 per cent to 48 per cent — then it would not have taken much to push the result the other way. Donald Trump’s victory adds some credence to the idea that Brexit was pre–ordained, part of a wave of history. But the campaign turned on

How California could be heading for its own version of Brexit

On the face of it, Brits and Californians don’t have much in common: one prefers a spot of Earl Grey, the other misguidedly quaffs health-faddish Kombucha. Yet Californians and Englishmen may agree on one thing: self-government. Many golden state separatists see the successful Brexit campaign as an inspiration. In fact, on the official ‘Yes California Independence‘ website, the president of the movement – Louis J Marinelli – mentions Brexit and what it could mean for his fellow Calexiteers: In 2016, the United Kingdom voted to leave the international community with their ‘Brexit’ vote. Our ‘Calexit’ referendum is about California joining the international community. You have a big decision to make. Supporters of

Fraser Nelson

Theresa May: ‘I get so frustrated with Whitehall’

The Prime Minister’s office is a small, unimpressive room in 10 Downing Street with miserable views and unexceptional furniture. Since moving in, Theresa May has spruced it up — but only a little. There is now a large glass meeting table; her predecessor preferred to chat on the sofas. She has also delved into the government art collection to retrieve two pictures of Oxford, where she honed her interest in politics and met Philip, her husband. She has also picked a painting of an English country church (she is of course a vicar’s daughter), and that’s about it. It’s a place for work and — very occasionally — interviews. We

Labour has even bigger problems than Jeremy Corbyn these days

Want proof of how bad things are for Labour? Jeremy Corbyn and his disastrous leadership is not even its biggest problem anymore. I write in The Sun that Labour’s biggest problem, and it is potentially an existential one, is that its reaction to the Brexit vote is threatening to make it a political irrelevance More than 60 percent of Labour seats voted to leave the EU. In these constituencies, being the party that is trying to block Brexit would be electoral suicide. That’s why the Labour leadership felt compelled to accept the government’s amendment this week saying Theresa May should start the formal, two-year process for leaving the EU by

Did the ‘rise of populism’ really cost David Cameron his job?

When The Spectator was founded 188 years ago, it became part of what would now be described as a populist insurgency. An out-of-touch Westminster elite, we said, was speaking a different language to the rest of London, let alone the rest of the country. Too many ‘of the bons mots vented in the House of Commons appear stale and flat by the time they have travelled as far as Wellington Street’. This would be remedied, we argued, by extending the franchise and granting the vote to the emerging middle class. Our Tory critics said any step towards democracy — a word which then caused a shudder — would start a

What can Nigel Farage be planning to wreck in 2017?

One remark from the Christmas party season knocks insistently around my head. It came from Nigel Farage on a staircase in the Ritz. For those who didn’t enjoy 2016, a year of political revolution, he gleefully promised: ‘2017 will be a hell of a sight worse.’ My, my. What did he mean? Had he taken one Ferrero Rocher too many? Or does Farage, like an increasing number of MPs, expect a general election next year, including further dramatic upsets? The biggest reason for pooh-poohing a 2017 election isn’t the Fixed-term Parliaments Act but Prime Minister’s character. Theresa May is extremely cautious and she doesn’t want to test the electorate just

Unforgiven

Now that almost six months have passed since the EU referendum, might it be time for old enemies to find common ground? Matthew Parris and Matt Ridley, two of the most eloquent voices on either side of the campaign, meet in the offices of The Spectator to find out.   MATTHEW PARRIS: Catastrophe has not engulfed us yet, it’s true. But I feel worse since the result, rather than better. I thought that, as in all hard-fought campaigns, you get terribly wound up and depressed when you lose. Then you pick yourself up, dust yourself down and start all over again. But my animosities — not just towards the Brexit

Tom Goodenough

What the papers say: Article 50 debate, Brexit ‘fog’ and ‘looney Labourites’

After MPs voted last night to back the Government’s plan to invoke Article 50 by the end of March, the Guardian says it’s good news that Parliament is now finally using its powers to shape the Brexit process. The paper says it’s ‘extraordinary’ that so much time has passed since the referendum, given how there is still no ‘real clarity about the government’s general aims’ in upcoming negotiations. It says yesterday, however, ‘some fog began to lift’: ‘At last, the great issue of the UK’s future relations with Europe was finally being discussed where it matters most of all, in our elected parliament,’ the paper says. But despite the merits

Martin Vander Weyer

Whatever happened to Sir George? A festive finale for an eventful year

Many (well, several) of you asked me what happened to George, the supermarket chairman who was the anti-hero of my Christmas fable last year. So I tracked him down, somewhere in the provinces, to bring you another episode… ‘Five minutes, Sir George,’ said a young man in black. ‘New boobs OK?’ George nodded, adjusted his embonpoint, and looked at himself in the full-length mirror. How the hell had it come to this? Actually 2016 had begun well. Readers may recall last December’s ‘Free Turkey’ incident, in which a boardroom invasion by carol-singing Santas, led by George’s student son Simon, coerced the supermarket group into giving Christmas fare to the poor

Brexit’s breaking points

Trying to write the first draft of history on the EU referendum and the leader-ship mess that followed had both its dramatic and its comic elements. My phone never stopped ringing with Eurosceptics keen to tell me why their contribution to a meeting that had previously escaped my notice was the decisive factor in securing victory. But when a vote is so close — 52 per cent to 48 per cent — then it would not have taken much to push the result the other way. Donald Trump’s victory adds some credence to the idea that Brexit was pre–ordained, part of a wave of history. But the campaign turned on

Spectator live blog: The Supreme Court’s Brexit hearing, day three

It’s day three of the Supreme Court’s landmark case on the triggering of Article 50. Here’s how the day unfolded:  4.15pm: The Supreme Court hearing has now finished for the day. The Lord Advocate, Lord Wolffe has been putting forward the Scottish Government’s case. So far, he has told the court that using prerogative powers to trigger Article 50 would be an ‘unconstitutional’ step. But he makes it clear that the Scottish Parliament does not have the power to veto Brexit. You can read the Scottish Government’s full submission to the Supreme Court here. 3.30pm: Ronan Lavery now takes up the argument on behalf of Northern Ireland. Lavery warns that Brexit

Tom Goodenough

What the papers say: Brexit, political pygmies and repentant Remainers

MPs will vote for the first time today on the Government’s Article 50 timeline. While Labour have said the decision to spell out the plan for Brexit is a ‘welcome climbdown’ by ministers, is this afternoon’s debate merely delaying the actual process of Britain leaving the EU? That’s the Sun’s verdict on today’s proceedings, with the paper saying a ‘coalition of political pygmies’ are ‘stringing out the process in Parliament’. It goes on to say that Theresa May’s opponents ‘should stop pretending’ they are worried about democracy and Parliamentary sovereignty and instead own up to ‘their true aim’ – ‘reversing the referendum result’. The Sun reserves its biggest ire for what

Michel Barnier plays hardball on Brexit

Michel Barnier, the Commission’s Brexit negotiator, has been giving a running commentary on Brexit this morning. Barnier, striking a predictably tough stance before the negotiations start, said that he wants the divorce aspects of the Article 50 deal concluded by October 2018, to give sufficient time for ratification. This, essentially, means that there’ll be one year of negotiations from after the German elections next autumn. But Barnier’s position is that only once this deal has been agreed, can talks move on to what the future relationship between the UK and the EU will be. In other words, no talks on trade until the exit process has been agreed. He emphasised

Spectator live blog: The Supreme Court’s Brexit hearing, day two

The second day of the Supreme Court hearing has seen the Government continue to put forward its case for why it should be allowed to pull the Article 50 trigger without the say so of Parliament. And Lord Pannick has been arguing why Parliament must give approval for the start of the process of Brexit. Here’s how the day unfolded on our Spectator live blog: 4.30pm: Pannick’s main pitch is about the power of Parliament. He tells the Supreme Court that ‘Parliament is sovereign and only Parliament can remove that which it has incorporated into domestic law’ – meaning that Brexit cannot be started by the Government without the agreement of Parliament. He

It’s time to challenge the Brexit Pollyannas

In his admirably brief and necessarily brutal, Brexit: What the Hell Happens Now, Ian Dunt tells how civil servants brief business leaders while they wait to meet David Davis. For all his appearance as a tough guy with the strength to handle the most complicated diplomatic crisis the British have faced since the Second World War, Davis seems closer in spirit to a bubbly PR girl than a hard-headed statesman. He wants to hear only good news. He wants to see only smiling faces. Like Bing Crosby and the Andrews Sisters, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union thinks we should all accentuate the positive. On no account

Brexit-bashers like Blair and Branson are the real enemies of the people

Here’s a tip for judges, businessmen, peers, politicians and former PMs who don’t like being called ‘enemies of the people’: stop behaving like enemies of the people. This week it is reported that Tony Blair is polishing his toothy grin to make a comeback into British politics, potentially as thwarter, or just tamer, of the ‘catastrophe’ of Brexit. It’s also reported that Richard Branson, the Brexit-bashing billionaire, has offered ‘tens of thousands’ of pounds to a gang of the great and good who want either to reverse the result of the referendum in which us dumb plebs made such a grave error, or at least insist that a second referendum be

Tory Brexiteers pressure May to quit EU single market and customs union

Normally, the Saturday before an autumn statement would be dominated by speculation about what is in it. But, as I say in The Sun today, both Number 10 and the Treasury are emphasising that while there’ll be important things on productivity, infrastructure and fiscal rules in Wednesday’s statement, there’ll be no rabbits out of hats. Partly, this is because of  Philip Hammond’s personality: he’s not a political showman. But it is also because he’s not got much room for manoeuvre.  As he has emphasised to Cabinet colleagues, the growth forecasts might not be dramatically lower than they were in March, but cumulatively they have a big effect—limiting what the government

This is the era of Donald Trump – and of Theresa May

Bob Dylan called it pretty much right. When he sang ‘your old road is rapidly ageing’ he was calling time on an old order that went on to die in 1968. The events of that year ushered in a liberal order, revolutionising social norms, which lasted until Thatcher and Reagan in 1980. The conservative era then returned, sorting out the mess left by the previous era and ending the Cold War: this was the time of battle-hardened leaders, with a battle to fight (and win). Then came the Blair and Bill Clinton era, modified slightly by David Cameron – defined by a ‘third way’ unwillingness to move too far to the

Google’s commitment is good news for Britain. But it doesn’t have much to do with Brexit

Google’s decision to employ an extra 3,000 people in London is undoubtedly great news for Britain. But it’s nonsense to try and tangle the company’s plans as being all – or, indeed, anything – about Brexit. Of course, it was only a matter of time before Google’s announcement was glimpsed through the Brexit prism. Everything is these days. Some have said the new jobs promised by Google and the firm’s £1bn investment is ‘despite’ the outcome of the referendum. In their coverage of the announcement, Bloomberg said tech firms had been left wondering ‘whether they’ll still be able to hire workers from overseas…after the country leaves the bloc’. This suggested Google’s announcement was something of a