Joanna Cherry: So much has been thrown under the bus to achieve one Tory aim

It wasn’t hard for us to reach the unanimous decision that we would vote against the bill. Scotland’s Government and its representatives were cut out of the negotiations that led to the deal implemented by the bill and therefore, unsurprisingly, our country’s interests are not served by it. The bill grants sweeping powers to the British Government without proper parliamentary scrutiny and threatens to make yet further inroads into devolved competences. Our heads would need to zip up the back for us to agree to own this mess. Even the Scottish Labour party can see that, apart from the ignominious Ian Murray.

Yesterday’s vote was not a meaningful vote on the deal because the Westminster Parliament, for all its glorious sovereignty, does not have the power to overturn the agreement Boris Johnson has reached with the EU. One of the first things he did when he got his majority was to re-table the EU Withdrawal Agreement Bill having removed the provisions which committed the Government to giving Parliament a final vote on the deal.

This restored the default position that the UK Parliament has no power to ratify or reject international treaties. That power lies with the Government who consult parliament only by a convention given statutory force in the Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010.

The argument that, by voting against the bill, SNP MPs voted for No Deal, is legally and constitutionally illiterate. These are not my words, but those of expert commentators Luke Cooper and Sam Fowles of the London School of Economics. I was disappointed not to get selected to speak at Westminster yesterday where I would have made this point, so I was pleased to hear Mike Russell make it clear in what was a memorable speech in the Scottish Parliament yesterday.

What MPs were voting on was not whether to approve the deal, but whether to give the British Government the powers necessary to implement the deal in domestic law. If a majority had voted against the bill it wouldn’t have stopped the Government from ratifying the deal. So, let’s knock on the head once and for all that the principled stand of SNP MPs risked a No-Deal Brexit.

READ MORE: Five great things which offered hope in an otherwise terrible year

I also respectfully disagree with those who argue that SNP MPs should have abstained or stayed away. I toyed with the idea of abstention early on, before I concluded that yesterday’s vote was about what opposition parties thought of the deal achieved rather than avoiding the chaos of No Deal. It is a bad deal for the UK and Scotland. There is very little in it for our service economy, it will damage trade and cost jobs and research shows that, as usual with Tory ideology, it is the poorest who will suffer most.

As Philippa Whitford said in her speech yesterday, we now see how the promises of the Leave campaign compare with reality.

While tariff-free access to the single market has been secured, contrary to Johnson’s lies, non-tariff barriers have been erected, meaning manufacturers and farmers will have to deal with time-consuming and bureaucratic checks at borders for things like customs, and plant and animal health.

CONTRARY to the sea of opportunity promised by Gove, analysis by the Scottish Government shows that for some key stocks UK fishing communities now face a worse deal than they had under the Commons Fisheries Policy. Even the pro-Brexit Scottish Fishermen’s Federation says the deal “falls very far short” of what was promised.

And on security, Priti Patel told a flat-out lie when she said that the deal makes the UK safer. As a third country, the UK has lost access to key databases – including the SIS II, which allows for real-time sharing of data relating to wanted or missing persons or objects. Evidence to parliamentary committees showed that the UK police forces consulted this source 600 million times in 2019.

All these interests were thrown under the bus to gain the prize of leaving the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Except under the Northern Ireland Protocol, where the ECJ still has a say on matters such as state aid with some reach into the UK.

Furthermore, the Brexit process revealed that the antipathy towards the court wasn’t just rooted in xenophobia, but in a more general antipathy to fundamental rights and the rule of law.

READ MORE: Why this ‘other’ EU trade deal is of great significance to the UK, too

This has not gone unnoticed by the EU, who have insisted on a clause in the deal allowing them to suspend the part covering Law Enforcement and Judicial Co-operation in Criminal Matters if the UK fails to sufficiently protect fundamental rights or the rule of law. Watch this space.

The EU have done an excellent job looking after the interests of their member states, including those of Ireland. The contrast with the UK Government’s capitulation on their red lines and their total failure to look after Scottish interests is striking.

Endorsing the SNP’s principled vote, Dr Kirsty Hughes of the Scottish Centre for European Relations said that the “EU understands very well, and agrees, that staying in the EU or a closer relationship was preferable and that putting up barriers is damaging.

There is plenty of sympathy for Scotland”. Charles Grant, the director of the Centre for European Reform, said: “If Scotland were to gain independence through legal means, and then seek membership, most EU leaders would be delighted.”

Ian Blackford ended his speech yesterday by saying: “There is now an empty seat at the top table in Europe. It will not be empty for long.”

Politics in Scotland in 2021 will be dominated by the question of how we get there.

Next month SNP members will meet at a National Assembly to consider a plan of action if Boris Johnson continues to refuse a Section 30 order. I have already suggested how the legal route might be further explored with a bill crafted by the Scottish Government. Others wish to see a plebiscite election considered and I hope this will also be discussed.

I believe what is now required is a multi-faceted strategy to pressurise the British Government into co-operating with us to ensure that the people of Scotland are afforded a means to reconsider the option of independence in such a way that the outcome will be internationally recognised.

Many, including most recently Professor John Curtice, have talked about the possibility of SNP MPs participating in parliamentary disruption if a Section 30 order is refused after the Holyrood election.

While I respectfully disagree with the suggestion that SNP MPs should boycott Westminster at this stage (because we are not elected on an abstentionist platform and have constituents who expect us to participate), I agree with Kenny MacAskill that we need to think about how our parliamentary tactics might change.

My participation in the struggle to protect women’s sex-based rights over the last two years has reminded me of the slogan – Deeds not Words. It’s a motto we in the SNP would do well to adopt in 2021.