Jump to content
Jools

The Positive Brexit Thread

Recommended Posts

image.png.602a385eee96bdf6f9a7e70bdebc5cc2.png

The short lived and not entirely successful rebellion over the UK Internal Market Bill has ended with a conciliatory compromise ‚Äď to set in law the ability of MPs to hold a vote before ministers could deploy the provisions in it that, if enacted, arguably would breach international law. The deal was struck yesterday evening between Downing Street, rebel commander Bob Neill, and Damian Green. To Guido it doesn‚Äôt seem like much of a climbdown, given that Boris said as much in Monday‚Äôs debate‚Ķ

‚ÄúThe passing of this Bill does not constitute the exercising of these powers‚Ķ If the powers were ever needed, Ministers would return to this House with a statutory instrument on which a vote‚ÄĒperhaps this is the question to which the hon. Gentleman is awaiting an answer‚ÄĒwould be held.‚Äú

The Government will table two amendments to its own Bill on Tuesday, firstly a redrafted version of the Neill Amendment ‚Äď setting in stone the need for a parliamentary vote beyond the requirements of ordinary statutory instruments, and secondly a clause to prevent significant litigation of the enactment of the controversial provisions. Tightening up the ability to deploy with the consent of the House.

Of course, the Government insists it still does not want to have to use these powers of last resort. But now it will have them in case the EU don’t offer concessions…

 

As per, made a mountain out of a worm cast didn't you, Remainiacs ūüôÉ

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, SwindonCanary said:

Image may contain: 1 person, glasses, text that says "LUNDGREN SWEDISH MEP WITH MESSAGE FOR URSULA VON DER LEYEN THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT "Iwonder as a Swedish citizen standing here today, why should we join in and pay for all of this? Why should Sweden borrow money and lend money to other EU countries without getting anything in return? "The longer you insist with this United States of Europe there will be more and more referendums going against being members of this club." LEA/E.EU"

Swedish people with a message for Mr Lungren

View of the EU,

Unfavourable 26%

Favourable 72%

Another RWNJ who does not have a clue what he's talking about.

Edited by A Load of Squit
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Jools said:

image.png.602a385eee96bdf6f9a7e70bdebc5cc2.png

The short lived and not entirely successful rebellion over the UK Internal Market Bill has ended with a conciliatory compromise ‚Äď to set in law the ability of MPs to hold a vote before ministers could deploy the provisions in it that, if enacted, arguably would breach international law. The deal was struck yesterday evening between Downing Street, rebel commander Bob Neill, and Damian Green. To Guido it doesn‚Äôt seem like much of a climbdown, given that Boris said as much in Monday‚Äôs debate‚Ķ

‚ÄúThe passing of this Bill does not constitute the exercising of these powers‚Ķ If the powers were ever needed, Ministers would return to this House with a statutory instrument on which a vote‚ÄĒperhaps this is the question to which the hon. Gentleman is awaiting an answer‚ÄĒwould be held.‚Äú

The Government will table two amendments to its own Bill on Tuesday, firstly a redrafted version of the Neill Amendment ‚Äď setting in stone the need for a parliamentary vote beyond the requirements of ordinary statutory instruments, and secondly a clause to prevent significant litigation of the enactment of the controversial provisions. Tightening up the ability to deploy with the consent of the House.

Of course, the Government insists it still does not want to have to use these powers of last resort. But now it will have them in case the EU don’t offer concessions…

 

As per, made a mountain out of a worm cast didn't you, Remainiacs ūüôÉ

 

Fantastic comedy gold from @Jools, you really are spoiling us today.  Fancy posting this today when the government looks in full on retreat on this. This Bill won't even get a third reading until the end of September. So it won't get to the Lords until October. And there it looks very unlikely to be able to progress without significant amendments. The Gov cannot invoke the Salisbury convention because the opposition is actually holding them to their election manifesto.

What are they going to do then? EU are open to a Johnson surrender while claiming victory?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‚Äé16‚Äé/‚Äé09‚Äé/‚Äé2020 at 13:03, sonyc said:

I try and manage not to most days ....but then I occasionally get annoyed and cannot resist being drawn in.

But ICF,...you're a sensible chap and you really shouldn't!

There's no risk of me getting tangled up in the Brexit debate sonyc, and although I was making a joke about this thread, I was also a little bit serious that this thread is a bit like getting into a time machine and going back to 2018 or so. 

 

On Brexit I feel a bit like the sergeant ("a grizzled old veteran") in Stephen King's The Stand (when everyone is dying of a pandemic) and there are two sets of US army soldiers having a gun battle with each other, and he stands up in the middle and shouts "FOR GAWD'S SAKE STOPPPPPP !" only to be cut down by a hail of bullets from both sides.

 

My take on Brexit was pretty much formed during 2016 and is as follows :

 

A  Brexit is a bad thing.

B  By the time of the referendum, for the UK to stay in the EU wasn't that great an option either.

C  The way Brexit has been implemented has been bad.  Both the UK and the EU are to blame for this.

D  The way people have opposed Brexit and tried to stop it, has made things a lot worse, than they otherwise would have been.

E.  As a result of Brexit - and the opposition to Brexit - we now have many fewer competent people in government.  This means our government's response to the pandemic has been worse than it would have been otherwise. 

 

These views tend to go down badly with¬†almost everyone, so I don't talk about Brexit very often, and haven't looked on this thread much in 2020.¬† I'll take my head down back below the parapet and make a diary note to look at this thread next in 2022 ūüėā......

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, It's Character Forming said:

There's no risk of me getting tangled up in the Brexit debate sonyc, and although I was making a joke about this thread, I was also a little bit serious that this thread is a bit like getting into a time machine and going back to 2018 or so. 

 

On Brexit I feel a bit like the sergeant ("a grizzled old veteran") in Stephen King's The Stand (when everyone is dying of a pandemic) and there are two sets of US army soldiers having a gun battle with each other, and he stands up in the middle and shouts "FOR GAWD'S SAKE STOPPPPPP !" only to be cut down by a hail of bullets from both sides.

 

My take on Brexit was pretty much formed during 2016 and is as follows :

 

A  Brexit is a bad thing.

B  By the time of the referendum, for the UK to stay in the EU wasn't that great an option either.

C  The way Brexit has been implemented has been bad.  Both the UK and the EU are to blame for this.

D  The way people have opposed Brexit and tried to stop it, has made things a lot worse, than they otherwise would have been.

E.  As a result of Brexit - and the opposition to Brexit - we now have many fewer competent people in government.  This means our government's response to the pandemic has been worse than it would have been otherwise. 

 

These views tend to go down badly with¬†almost everyone, so I don't talk about Brexit very often, and haven't looked on this thread much in 2020.¬† I'll take my head down back below the parapet and make a diary note to look at this thread next in 2022 ūüėā......

It's been polarising for sure. This thread simply reflects the country I'm quite sure. I have a couple of friends (perhaps I should say they're now downgraded to acquaintances ūü§≠) who will argue or defend their Brexit positions to the death even in the face of serious constitutional change and political shenanigans. Nothing will change them. Nothing convinces them.

I've never known such an issue create such intransigence. Nothing will change here. Yet (and you'll gather I'm a remainer) this thread is a kind of place to grieve, to share thoughts with very decent fellows and thus, the great majority are very caring of what is happening in the UK. Otherwise they wouldn't post. Jools and one or two others are taking the p1ss I'm very sure. 

 

It's where we are in the country....perhaps it's a dislike of the other, (or unhappiness / intolerance of difference) and has always been lurking under the surface anyway and Brexit has simply brought it all out.

I blame Cameron fair and square. He used the weapon purely as a political gamble. We have got another gambler and a joker in charge now but Cameron was the architect. More than most PMs, he has had the single most negative effect on this country (imho). All done in an attempt to heal a rift in his own party. What did Danny Dyer say about him again? It was spot on.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's one of the greatest things the Spectator has ever written and Andrew Neil should be very proud. Some people could say it was a right wing, government approved hack desperately trying to find a distraction for his mates shoddy behaviour. But not me.¬†ūüĎć

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, sonyc said:

It's been polarising for sure. This thread simply reflects the country I'm quite sure. I have a couple of friends (perhaps I should say they're now downgraded to acquaintances ūü§≠) who will argue or defend their Brexit positions to the death even in the face of serious constitutional change and political shenanigans. Nothing will change them. Nothing convinces them.

I've never known such an issue create such intransigence. Nothing will change here. Yet (and you'll gather I'm a remainer) this thread is a kind of place to grieve, to share thoughts with very decent fellows and thus, the great majority are very caring of what is happening in the UK. Otherwise they wouldn't post. Jools and one or two others are taking the p1ss I'm very sure. 

 

It's where we are in the country....perhaps it's a dislike of the other, (or unhappiness / intolerance of difference) and has always been lurking under the surface anyway and Brexit has simply brought it all out.

I blame Cameron fair and square. He used the weapon purely as a political gamble. We have got another gambler and a joker in charge now but Cameron was the architect. More than most PMs, he has had the single most negative effect on this country (imho). All done in an attempt to heal a rift in his own party. What did Danny Dyer say about him again? It was spot on.

Have you watched the Channel 4 docu drama on the referendum campaign starting Benedict Cumberbach as Dominic Cummings? It’s on Netflix and you might find it cathartic! 
 

Basically it portrays the Remain campaign as an entitled and complacent bunch (seems pretty realistic to me) whereas the Leave campaign were more savvy about the electoral buttons they needed to press.

 

Also I love one quote about Corbyn ‚ÄúHe was anti the EEC in 1980 and he hasn‚Äôt changed his mind about anything since then‚ÄĚ.

 

Overall I felt it was a pretty fair portrayal of the referendum campaign and a reasonable explanation of why Remain lost.

 

i have to agree about Cameron. Fundamentally he was lazy. If he’d been willing to put in the effort to build bridges with other countries in the EU we could really have been pushing the EU the way we wanted it to go (the same applies to the previous government TBF).

 

And having called the referendum¬†, they really needed a positive engaging campaign whereas they allowed the other side to take the lead and got backed into a corner with ‚Äúproject fear‚ÄĚ.

Edited by It's Character Forming

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cameron and later Swinson can take the largest portion of blame for me. Two "useful idiots" in Russian terminology. Cameron set the whole thing off by agreeing to the referendum, Swinson gave Boris his GE win opportunity when in Parliament the Tories were in total disarray and minority status. If she had waited until Spring, an 80 seat Tory majority that can do anything it wants for 5 years may not have occurred. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, It's Character Forming said:

Have you watched the Channel 4 docu drama on the referendum campaign starting Benedict Cumberbach as Dominic Cummings? It’s on Netflix and you might find it cathartic! 
 

Basically it portrays the Remain campaign as an entitled and complacent bunch (seems pretty realistic to me) whereas the Leave campaign were more savvy about the electoral buttons they needed to press.

 

Also I love one quote about Corbyn ‚ÄúHe was anti the EEC in 1980 and he hasn‚Äôt changed his mind about anything since then‚ÄĚ.

 

Overall I felt it was a pretty fair portrayal of the referendum campaign and a reasonable explanation of why Remain lost.

 

i have to agree about Cameron. Fundamentally he was lazy. If he’d been willing to put in the effort to build bridges with other countries in the EU we could really have been pushing the EU the way we wanted it to go (the same applies to the previous government TBF).

 

And having called the referendum¬†, they really needed a positive engaging campaign whereas they allowed the other side to take the lead and got backed into a corner with ‚Äúproject fear‚ÄĚ.

Yes I watched that drama (mainly to try and understand Cummings and how Cumberbatch might play him). Cummings is a strange fish. Worryingly, he has been given what feels like a comparatively free rein. It will all be revealed in the fullness of time.

Project Fear is a term that should have applied to themselves in hindsight. In my mind it's hideous what is evolving. It doesn't look like this great deal will be made.

Corbyn you felt, was always anti-EU. I felt he should have been far stronger. I doubt he would have managed C19 well either, indeed I'm sure of it.  

If we were to have a vote again I'm also quite sure of a reversal in the outcome (as Rees Mogg has admitted). But...it's all too late.

 

Edited by sonyc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO we'll see movement on Nov 5th. And my prediction is a "technical extension" to the transition period. 

If Biden wins the election on Nov 4, then there is no UK - US trade agreement that takes priority over an EU - US trade agreement, and there may be no UK - US trade agreement at all if the UK forces a hard border in Ireland. 

The UK freight industry is screaming at Michael Gove the new customs clearance system isn't ready, and will not be ready, and roll-on-roll-off services will grind to a halt. And we haven't really had to face up to the physical evidence of 50 new lorry parks being built around the county in the next 60 days. People won't be able to ignore that activity. 

At some point in time there will have to be a decision made on how to continue, so an agreement to extend transition arrangements until the technical difficulties are resolved becomes the fig leaf that both parties would need to back down. 

https://twitter.com/pmdfoster/status/1306634327892127744

 

Edited by Surfer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, sonyc said:

It's been polarising for sure. This thread simply reflects the country I'm quite sure. I have a couple of friends (perhaps I should say they're now downgraded to acquaintances ūü§≠) who will argue or defend their Brexit positions to the death even in the face of serious constitutional change and political shenanigans. Nothing will change them. Nothing convinces them.

I've never known such an issue create such intransigence. Nothing will change here. Yet (and you'll gather I'm a remainer) this thread is a kind of place to grieve, to share thoughts with very decent fellows and thus, the great majority are very caring of what is happening in the UK. Otherwise they wouldn't post. Jools and one or two others are taking the p1ss I'm very sure. 

 

It's where we are in the country....perhaps it's a dislike of the other, (or unhappiness / intolerance of difference) and has always been lurking under the surface anyway and Brexit has simply brought it all out.

I blame Cameron fair and square. He used the weapon purely as a political gamble. We have got another gambler and a joker in charge now but Cameron was the architect. More than most PMs, he has had the single most negative effect on this country (imho). All done in an attempt to heal a rift in his own party. What did Danny Dyer say about him again? It was spot on.

I agree about Cameron, but May needs to be in the frame too. The referendum vote, because of the blatant lies of the Leave campaigners, was for two irreconcilable aims, so there could never be a good Brexit. You could regain a supposedly lost sovereignty and destroy the economy or save the economy and not get this supposed lost sovereignty back.

But May had a chance to produce a typically English compromise. All she needed was the courage to face down the ERG right at the outset by announcing that the UK was leaving the single market, to get out from under freedom of movement, but was going to stay in a  customs' union, with EU  rules etc, to limit the economic damage.

Instead she caved in, ruling out the single market and a customs' union, with the result that she became a laughing-stock of a PM and the ERG is in effect the government, with the unspeakable Johnson as PM.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Herman said:

It's one of the greatest things the Spectator has ever written and Andrew Neil should be very proud. Some people could say it was a right wing, government approved hack desperately trying to find a distraction for his mates shoddy behaviour. But not me.¬†ūüĎć

Not looked at this but why does it have anything to do with Andrew Neil?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, PurpleCanary said:

I agree about Cameron, but May needs to be in the frame too. The referendum vote, because of the blatant lies of the Leave campaigners, was for two irreconcilable aims, so there could never be a good Brexit. You could regain a supposedly lost sovereignty and destroy the economy or save the economy and not get this supposed lost sovereignty back.

But May had a chance to produce a typically English compromise. All she needed was the courage to face down the ERG right at the outset by announcing that the UK was leaving the single market, to get out from under freedom of movement, but was going to stay in a  customs' union, with EU  rules etc, to limit the economic damage.

Instead she caved in, ruling out the single market and a customs' union, with the result that she became a laughing-stock of a PM and the ERG is in effect the government, with the unspeakable Johnson as PM.

I would agree with May having some culpability (whilst we are here dishing out some blame). She wavered and was neither one thing nor the other, which didn't marry with the style she adopted in her former role as a 'no nonsense' Home Office minister. She also was seemingly deaf to Grenfell when previously we all saw her standing on the steps of Downing Street giving her one nation speech about the little people. Then we have the empty Johnson, either re-arranging the deckchairs on the Titanic with his small giveaways to appease or U turning like no other because he hasn't thought through the implications of his policies or quickly taken actions.

Ignoring the pro EU left (Swinson, Greens, parts of Labour and the remainers generally) how does one allocate the blame in percentages? Perhaps....40 (Cameron), 30 (May) and 30 (Johnson)? All in all, it's a moot point though isn't it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We joked about her recently but if Leadsom had won the leadership then the "remainer government" argument could never have been used to cover up the failure of Brexit. The leave camp would have owned the sorry mess from the start. 

Who to blame will fill many a book in years to come but it all starts with Cameron, Osborne, austerity, poor campaigning and decades of scapegoating the EU for internal policy failures. 

Corbyn's disinterest, Swinson's awful, naive tactics and Johnson's bandwagoning all play a crucial role in how we got here but the rot started with Cameron's hubris. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Herman said:

We joked about her recently but if Leadsom had won the leadership then the "remainer government" argument could never have been used to cover up the failure of Brexit. The leave camp would have owned the sorry mess from the start. 

Who to blame will fill many a book in years to come but it all starts with Cameron, Osborne, austerity, poor campaigning and decades of scapegoating the EU for internal policy failures. 

Corbyn's disinterest, Swinson's awful, naive tactics and Johnson's bandwagoning all play a crucial role in how we got here but the rot started with Cameron's hubris. 

Actually Herman I think Brexit is just a reactionary upheaval to a reset of identity, that nearly all European and Asian countries went through in the 20th (or even late 19th) centuries - the end of 'empires', a realisation of your true place and weight in world and the forging of a new identity, new national 'myths'. Yes Brexit is reactionary nostalgia for past glories in world that no longer exists as we enter the modern 21st century. The end of WW2 with the UK 'undefeated' and the dregs of empire left us unreformed, ill-equipped and frankly in many quarters unrealistic. Brexit followed by its economic and diplomatic shake-out will enforce, painfully, the reset that is overdue and needed with a new perspectives.

All countries go through these upheavals - the USA even now is stressing as the PRC takes its economic and in due course its scientific 'crown'.

Give it 10 to 20 years and the UK will be a happy European country at ease with itself fully reintegrated with Europe with the 'Brexit' period seen as an aberration - the last throws of empire and tantrums from those refusing to accept the modern world and  living in the past.  It's an old story .....

Edited by Yellow Fever
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

what not many people seem to remember is that Johnson intended to break the international agreement before he signed it. Time to get rid of political parties and make local representatives accountable of their spendthrift.

https://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2020/09/johnson-intended-to-break-the-withdrawal-agreement-even-before-he-signed-it/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Actually Herman I think Brexit is just a reactionary upheaval to a reset of identity, that nearly all European and Asian countries went through in the 20th (or even late 19th) centuries - the end of 'empires', a realisation of your true place and weight in world and the forging of a new identity, new national 'myths'. Yes Brexit is reactionary nostalgia for past glories in world that no longer exists as we enter the modern 21st century. The end of WW2 with the UK 'undefeated' and the dregs of empire left us unreformed, ill-equipped and frankly in many quarters unrealistic. Brexit followed by its economic and diplomatic shake-out will enforce, painfully, the reset that is overdue and needed with a new perspectives.

All countries go through these upheavals - the USA even now is stressing as the PRC takes its economic and in due course its scientific 'crown'.

Give it 10 to 20 years and the UK will be a happy European country at ease with itself fully reintegrated with Europe with the 'Brexit' period seen as an aberration - the last throws of empire and tantrums from those refusing to accept the modern world and  living in the past.  It's an old story .....

Great long term analysis and rather truthful look at Britain's problems. It does show the major rift in the country of those that accepted our role in modern world and those that can't, the jingoists, nationalists, kippers etc.

Maybe we should sit back and watch them finally see reality even though we'll have to take the painful medicine as well. Not that we have that much choice at the moment. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Herman said:

Great long term analysis and rather truthful look at Britain's problems. It does show the major rift in the country of those that accepted our role in modern world and those that can't, the jingoists, nationalists, kippers etc.

Maybe we should sit back and watch them finally see reality even though we'll have to take the painful medicine as well. Not that we have that much choice at the moment. 

It's expressed by others in similar ways 'British Exceptionalism' and so on.

Amounts to the same thing - a teenage tantrum before we settle down and accept the real world and our true position within it. We should be leading Europe along with France and Germany. That's what they wanted too!

I suppose what I was trying to clumsily say is that most countries got their 'reality check' a century ago - Japan, Germany - nearly all of Europe and are now better for it, grew up, and put aside childish backward things like 'Empire' and blind nationalism. We sadly have to learn the hard way.

Edited by Yellow Fever

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Yellow Fever said:

 

I suppose what I was trying to clumsily say is that most countries got their 'reality check' a century ago - Japan, Germany - nearly all of Europe and are now better for it, grew up, and put aside childish backward things like 'Empire' and blind nationalism. We sadly have to learn the hard way.

I am pretty sure nationalism remains an incredibly powerful emotion, in Europe and beyond.  It has, thankfully, often found over forms or expressions in the west but to think that there is less tribalism in the world is refusing to look at the facts

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Yellow Fever said:

Actually Herman I think Brexit is just a reactionary upheaval to a reset of identity, that nearly all European and Asian countries went through in the 20th (or even late 19th) centuries - the end of 'empires', a realisation of your true place and weight in world and the forging of a new identity, new national 'myths'. Yes Brexit is reactionary nostalgia for past glories in world that no longer exists as we enter the modern 21st century. The end of WW2 with the UK 'undefeated' and the dregs of empire left us unreformed, ill-equipped and frankly in many quarters unrealistic. Brexit followed by its economic and diplomatic shake-out will enforce, painfully, the reset that is overdue and needed with a new perspectives.

All countries go through these upheavals - the USA even now is stressing as the PRC takes its economic and in due course its scientific 'crown'.

Give it 10 to 20 years and the UK will be a happy European country at ease with itself fully reintegrated with Europe with the 'Brexit' period seen as an aberration - the last throws of empire and tantrums from those refusing to accept the modern world and  living in the past.  It's an old story .....

I think this is a thoughtful overview or 'seagull view' considering the wider meaning of Brexit or perhaps even the deeper undercurrents in the national psyche. The WW2 theme is very relevant I believe and it's interesting to see (visit too, as I did in Germany two years ago at Bonn) how Germany has 're-understood' itself (if that is a word I can use as a made up one) and made peace with its past. We are the 'land of hope and glory' led by populists.

It's not just a UK thing either is it? Perhaps Brexit was inevitable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Barbe bleu said:

I am pretty sure nationalism remains an incredibly powerful emotion, in Europe and beyond.  It has, thankfully, often found over forms or expressions in the west but to think that there is less tribalism in the world is refusing to look at the facts

 

Maybe but my phrase was 'blind nationalism'. Those that are sensible see past it and yes we all want to beat the French at soccer, even the Germans on a good day but for most of us that is the limit of these rivalries. That seems to be the European way.

If you want good examples of how Johnson and the Brexiteers play blind nationalism stirring up hatred I give  you 'Surrender' document or 'Blockade'.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, sonyc said:

It's not just a UK thing either is it? Perhaps Brexit was inevitable.

Yes - The UK or perhaps 'England' needs such a moment to put its past behind it and then move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Van wink said:

Not looked at this but why does it have anything to do with Andrew Neil?

It was Neil's extraordinary on and off camera outbursts during This Week against Owen Jones when the later attempted to hold Neil to account for the Spectator's editorial policy that was effectively the beginning of the end of Neil's BBC career.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, PurpleCanary said:

I agree about Cameron, but May needs to be in the frame too. The referendum vote, because of the blatant lies of the Leave campaigners, was for two irreconcilable aims, so there could never be a good Brexit. You could regain a supposedly lost sovereignty and destroy the economy or save the economy and not get this supposed lost sovereignty back.

But May had a chance to produce a typically English compromise. All she needed was the courage to face down the ERG right at the outset by announcing that the UK was leaving the single market, to get out from under freedom of movement, but was going to stay in a  customs' union, with EU  rules etc, to limit the economic damage.

Instead she caved in, ruling out the single market and a customs' union, with the result that she became a laughing-stock of a PM and the ERG is in effect the government, with the unspeakable Johnson as PM.

Effectively the Conservative Party ceased to exist as a conservative party in the traditional sense. May's problem was to be in charge when this became obvious. Facing down the ERG wouldn't have been anymore conservative than Johnson's purge of the Remainers. A conservative party would have rejected the anti-EU rhetoric back in 1992, the failure to do so brought us to the UK's current predicament.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...