New LibDem revoke article 50 policy seems like a self-inflicted wound

It must have seemed like a good idea at the time but it seems to me that the new LibDem policy of revoking Article 50 is a self-inflicted wound.

From this point on, every interviewer will raise this when they talk to a senior LibDem.

The spokesperson will have to explain that the revoke policy only kicks in if the LibDems are in government. They will be forced to go on to point out that they have no chance of winning a general election. This will remind voters that by voting LibDem they are voting for the party whose realistic best hope is to come third.

The next question the interviewer will ask is whether the revoke policy would be a red line in the event that the LibDems are negotiating to be part of a coalition government.

The LibDem will then point out that they won't go into coalition with Corbyn or Johnson so the next question will be about whether that would apply if the Labour or Tory leader changed. Then we're back to the red line question.

If nothing else it will eat up the LibDem spokesperson's air time.

Arch Remainers will vote for the LibDems anyway. I really can't see how the revocation of Article 50 will help the LibDems woo many Labour or Tory Remainers. It's a step too far. Seems like student politics to me.

A vanilla Norway option would suit Boris just fine

The Telegraph are reporting tonight that Boris is considering plans for a regulatory border in the Irish Sea. Maybe this will end up being the deal he comes up with.

It's also reported that he's tearing up the restrictions on foreign students; letting them stay for two years after graduation.

Boris is also in favour of an amnesty for illegal migrants.

Any fair minded person would conclude that Boris's main concern in wanting to leave the EU was not  to end freedom of movement.

I think a vanilla Norway option would suit him just fine. In other words, leave the EU and join the EEA. Yes, the UK would be in the single market and freedom of movement would remain. On the plus side, the UK would be out of the customs union, out of the CAP and out of the CFP. It would also go a long way to solving the Irish backstop issue.

Personally, I think he could sell it to the public, especially if he combined it with making the benefits system more difficult for EU citizens to access. He could take steps without breaking any single market rules. One idea I came up with is to give all children National Insurance credits starting on their first day of secondary school. By the time they got to 18 they would have over 5 years of contributions. You'd then make the benefits system contingent on having 5 years worth of NI contributions or credits.

Whether it's even possible to join the EEA is the question. The UK never did give notice to leave it. Depending who you believe, that's because it wasn't necessary or someone in May's government thought they'd keep that door slightly ajar.

That general election could be a long time coming

Until recently, media commentators have been assuming that the next general election will be on Thursday 21 November or, perhaps, in early December.

That assumption is based on Corbyn stating that there will be an election after 31 October; once the EU departure date has been extended again.

On parliament's return from prorogation there will be a Johnson Queen's Speech which looks very likely to be voted down. There will then likely be a confidence vote in Johnson's government which is very likely to succeed.

Following a vote of no confidence which only requires a simple majority to pass, the FTPA (Fixed Term Parliament Act) then allows 14 days for an alternative government to be formed that can command the support of the House. If no such government can be formed, a general election follows.

Whether a new government can be formed is where it gets interesting. The third biggest party in parliament is the SNP with 35 seats. They're not concerned about a general election because, with the recent resignation of the popular Ruth Davidson, they think they'll do very well. On the other hand, Labour may be able to convince them to support a Corbyn administration with the promise of a Scottish independence referendum or the cancellation of Trident. It's not impossible to envisage them voting for a Corbyn government.

Next are the Lib Dems, currently with 17 seats but growing weekly it seems. They too are polling well and don't fear a general election. Swinson said that she wouldn't support a Corbyn led government. On the face of it, that seems unambiguous but circumstances change. The promise of a second referendum might persuade them. If all they needed to do was abstain on a Corbyn Queen's Speech this would suit them even better. They could argue that this didn't constitute active support. However, the numbers are so tight that it's doubtful that abstaining would be sufficient.

What I believe is very unlikely is that Corbyn would allow another Labour MP to be prime minister. Swinson touted the idea of Ken Clarke being caretaker PM. I suppose that's possible but I really don't see Corbyn going for that idea. It really is for the leader of the official opposition to try to form a government.

Any new government needs 320 votes for a majority. Labour (247), the SNP (35), the Lib Dems (17), Plaid (4) and the single Green total 304. That is tantalisingly close.

The 32 Independent MPs outnumber the Lib Dems. These are mostly Tories who have had the whip withdrawn. This group could be key.

Most of these Independent MPs would not support a Corbyn government that was trying to implement the full list of Labour's policies. On the other hand, they would not support a Johnson government either. In this respect they fall into the same camp as the Lib Dems but many are not keen on the idea of a general election because they fear losing their seats. Some of this group might be persuaded to abstain in order to allow for a Corbyn government.

Therefore it seems perfectly conceivable that we could have a Corbyn led government. It would be unable to implement many of its policies and it would be inherently unstable. However, if it concentrated on Brexit-related matters it could probably survive long enough for a second referendum to be held. Such a referendum would undoubtedly lead to the UK remaining in the EU because it would pit a "Brexit in name only" deal against Remain.

Already some Labour MPs are talking about precisely this scenario; a second referendum followed by an election in Spring 2020.

This puts even more pressure on Boris Johnson to conclude Brexit by 31 October.