The EU Don't Like it Up 'Em

Unless I have missed it, I have not seen a single commentator who thinks that Mrs May’s “Chequers” plan has any chance of success as proposed.  Even if she steers it through Parliament to the point of actual negotiation, by overcoming the increasingly strident opposition of various factions within her own party, her grand scheme will almost certainly be either rejected out of hand by the EU or face such critical demands for concessions that it becomes worthless.  She must know this and its consequences for a potentially chaotic conclusion (if the latest EU project fear is believed) and yet she persists.  It is believed Einstein said that the mark of insanity was doing the same thing over and over again but expecting a different result.  Perhaps this truth will dawn on Mrs May as she enjoys her “well earned” break?  Perhaps she should reflect, whilst on her walking holiday, that she was elected on the Lancaster House manifesto and that that road not taken should be the direction of travel, after all?  Who in her party could deny that collective responsibility?  Even if the change of direction should prove a contortion too far, Mrs May should, at least, recognise that she must get out of the way and let someone with commitment get on with it?  It is about time be began negotiating with some purpose other than lame surrender.  Corporal Jones would have remarked, aptly, “they don’t like it up ‘em!”

Justine Greening's Brexit Solution

James Forsyth says, depressingly, “what’s done is done, and Brexiteers need to accept this. The talks have been terribly mishandled, the basic rules of negotiation have not been followed, a Tory majority has been blown in a needless election, and the Prime Minister is now at the mercy of the EU and parliament. In short, Britain is in a hole. What matters now is finding a way out.”  Sadly, even Denis Healey’s advice to “stop digging” will, in the present circumstances, be inadequate.

Justine Greening reckons that the only solution is to “take the final Brexit decision out of the hands of deadlocked politicians, away from the backroom deals, and give it back to the people.  This, we remember, would be the situation before Gina Miller and her allies began their campaign of destruction post referendum.  This time, M* Greening foresees a “unique chance to settle the European question for a generation.”  The best we could say about M* Greening’s optimism is that history is not on her side - didn’t Dodgy Dave say something similar during his project fear? Most importantly, what would there be to stop Parliament grabbing hold of the whole process, once again, if they didn’t like what the people decided?  Remember, it was Parliament that could not decide, in the first place, whether to leave the EU or stay in.  Spinelessly, they had asked the electorate to decide in a referendum and promised to be bound, as a parliament, by the decision. This wasn’t just a simple majority of members, by the way, the vote was effectively unanimous. Now they fight, with every constitutional device at their disposal, to frustrate and reverse the process by seizing back control of the implementation of the decision. And now they have made a hash of that, a pathetic band of ditherers seek to slope their shoulders and off- load the whole can of worms to the people in the guise of a “meaningful” second referendum!  M* Greening, today, proposes a new referendum with three choices:

• Accepting the PM’s negotiated deal
• Staying in the EU
• Leaving with no deal

Her choices for the ballot paper are deceptively simple and would, clearly, suit the banal level of debate to which politics has recently sunk.  But the options contain so many unanswered questions that they are almost meaningless.  Does anyone really understand what the PM seeks?  What would staying in the EU entail, joining the Euro, for example and is it even practicable?  What does no-deal on WTO terms look like (not so bad, actually)?  Most importantly, there is one significant option that has been overlooked, namely, leaving with a negotiated free trade deal with EU (which should have been the starting point for negotiations all along)?  How many more options might there be?

M* Greening believes that her referendum proposal, derived by means of first and second preference votes, would deliver a decisive consensus.  You may agree that this is unlikely?  Quite apart from the poisonous aftertaste of democratic betrayal that any result would generate, the simple difficulty of defining a question upon which both sides would feel comfortable to be bound, would be highly unlikely.

Some may remember Mushroom's previous message to parliament – “you got us into this mess, so you get us out.” Don't come to us now wringing your hands and complaining that it has all become too difficult.  Look in the mirror and repeat after me:

• Governments do not trade – they only get in the way!

• The Brexit terms I advocate will allow the UK to:

• Trade freely and make whatever international deals are in the national interest
• Make and enforce our own laws
• Control who comes into our country

EU White (Flag) Paper

RAF Centenary

As announced, I went to London yesterday and mingled with the vast crowd assembled to watch the flypast.  A Red Arrow said once (or something like it) that the object of the display was to thrill the ignorant and impress the informed.  I was thrilled.  The parade was wonderful and seeing all the current Standards on show was particularly moving.  The flypast seemed to work perfectly and it was lovely to hear the cries of enthusiastic admiration from the general public as each section flew over.  I don't suppose we shall see the like again?  Mind you, some of the aircraft participating have aged well - a friend told me that he had flown one the Hurricanes on display yesterday in the Battle of Britain Anniversary flypast 28 years ago.  That says something about airworthiness!

RAF Flypast

Having served for over one third of its existance, I'm off to London to watch the RAF Centenary Flypast.  Apparently, there may be some hazard to navigation - manouvering the one hundred-aircraft formation round a highly polished, £50 billion, giant turd-shaped blimp tethered over Westminster.

Very Pretty but Hard to Understand

An interpretation of the oft repeated double portmanteau “Brexit means Brexit,” is becoming clear – it doesn’t mean anything of the sort.  I am grateful to a pal in Northumberland for pointing out a literary parallel:  "when I use a word," Humpty Dumpy said in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less!”  A point of view obviously welcome to the collection of Slithy Toves at Chequers last week where not a single Bandersnatch exposed themselves.