A World of Nonsense

Brexit is so difficult – from a CEO of a multi-Billion £ company (and many others in the same category) and his pay exceeds £5m pa. For that sort of money I would have thought that with such talent he (it is usually he) could have solved Fermat's Last Theorem before breakfast!

A time limited back stop is not a back stop( back stop numerous politicians). Terminological inexactitude – a non time limiting back stop is a full stop! Much beloved of politicians and so called experts whose inexactitudes cloak deliberate deception.

Why don’t you go back to the countries where you came from (Trump) – but I am not racist. However I am prepared to play the race card to secure my base support – probably worse than being an out right racist.

Identity Politics is fashionable but it is part of political discourse it is neither an end in itself nor progressive when it seeks to act exclusively – "only such an identity can act and judge itself" – an Exclusive Brethren determined by by race or colour or religion etc (the writer speaking).

The best defender of religious freedom is a liberal, democratic tolerant society – that is what should be built. The sins of the fathers should not be visited on their sons – victim hood and revenge are no basis for progress of any kind (the writer speaking).

Enough now listen to Radio 3 – Beethoven, Ades and Nielsen.

Brexit Political Journalists and professional Politicians are Drongos

As every day goes by the Journalists and professional politicians in the UK continue to insult the electorate’s intelligence!

Another referendum would not heal a divided country it would entrench division. Moreover any close result would not settle the matter – a decisive result – say 2/3 to 1/3 is not a realistic proposition. A close result would not end the dispute. Hence “Final Say” is a sham, a delusion, a cheat! A referendum with Remain on the ballot paper would confirm the professional politicians insulting view that the people got it wrong first time round so have another go and come up with the right answer! (see "You can never underestimate the stupidity of the of the general public." Scott Adams, American Cartoonist, b.1957).

The quality of debate is abysmal! Setting a firm date at this time to leave is childish. What is grown up is detailing how the UK leaves! The EU is equally juvenile. Saying that the Withdrawal Agreement – rejected three times by the UK Parliament - is not up for negotiation is understandable but surely they must know that that only enhances the possibility of no deal - which we know Germany does not want – although the self obsessed Macron with his delusions of grandeur might mis-step that one.

A sensible UK approach to honestly and genuinely (not too many in Parliament and among the media are doing that which just goes to show how democratic they are!) honouring the result of the Brexit referendum would be for the UK to take control of the timetable and agenda. Challenging the EU to eject us. So say to them we do have a date of 31^st October – are you prepared to re-open the negotiations on the Withdrawal Agreement and have genuine and honest discussions with a view to agreement addressing the concerns the UK has. A prompt reply is required despite your holidays. If you prevaricate we will take that as a no! We do not want any more weasel words about EU legal difficulties in relation to Data Protection as to security for example. We expect reciprocity!

We will fulfil are legal obligations as to a financial settlement provided the EU does the same for example in the case of software provision for GPS. Additionally we would require a detailed audit of any claim in relation to the financial settlement to be independently audited and made public! If genuine and honest negotiations are to take place then this could take several months so let us make start and see how things proceed. Since most of the detail is known the UK would review progress at the end of February 2020. If we cannot see sufficient and/or meaningful progress we leave!

As you can see I never go into negotiations as a supplicant – it is all a matter of backbone and intellectual capability. Even as a Remain voter I am not prepared to sell my country down the river.

Goodbye Theresa - Hello ??

This really is an abysmal time in British (English) politics. Shallow self serving grand standing professional politicians and Journalists. Saw Philip Hammond on the Andrew Marr show today and his demeanour was one of defeat. His cover
of seeking to thwart Brexit now gone as May is leaving!  My main concern however is the complete lack of real incisive questioning and thinking! With this damn Brexit thing it is where we go from here not what you said in 2006 etc etc.
Of course shallow and self serving is not confined to Britain - it is rife in many parts of the EU. For example the so called Backstop. Of course the Republic wants a united Ireland, however the worst possible outcome is no deal especially as the UK is not going to erect a border but the EU probably will! Also misunderstanding of what international law says - fly over space is governed by international law and UN conventions not EU law. The question therefore is how long could the Republic in this case, France in the case of perishable products also Belgium, Holland and Denmark and Cars from Germany, Spain and Czech Republic last out without a deal. The UK also has to seriously consider this aspect but we have a history of being bloody minded. There will be a deal whether it will be before we actually leave or sometime after is a moot point. On the UK side it is clear that a revised deal cannot be done before 31st October and if both sides genuinely want a deal it will take us past that date. So stop posturing and grow up! Else hauter/arrogance and complacency will see us all lose.   

An end to Brexit games

I am prompted to write again as the metropolitan spoilt elite - (this time in the form of Andrew Adonis - a member of the un-elected House of Lords)(who by their self absorption, dismissed those outside the M25 as not counting democratically thus leading to the majority Leave vote - still argue for a re-run of the 2016 referendum in the form of "Deal" or Remain. There is a big hole in this view in that the Remain argument has already been run and it lost even though I voted to stay. So to move forward, any referendum, and there are compelling reasons not to have one, not the least of which is that it will increase divisiveness and uncertainty, should only be between whatever "Deal" is concluded or No Deal. Only in this way will we be able to see and end to this nation splitting madness. Remainers have to let go! And let us not go down the economic damage road - Cameron and Osborne effectively trashed the Treasury's competence and independence with their forecasting hyperbole. Leaving the EU will have some economic disadvantages - but anyone with some experience and common sense knows that the time horizon for such forecasts (they are not predictions) is very short. In truth you can make your own future. The research into reasons for voting Leave show predominantly it was the feeling that economically, politically and socially (Eatwell and Goodwin) an elite had cornered the market on influence and power and the majority were being ignored. Thus the EU was perceived as part of that elite (in many respects rightly so). So until this alienation has been effectively dealt with we are left in this purgatory - all the more reason to plot a way out which also properly addresses the concerns of those who are alienated!

A few more thoughts - BREXIT

What is the difference between "crashing out with no deal" and managing transition on trade to WTO terms. Think about it! Who and what is standing in the way of such an orderly exit. The EU's hands are not clean!
Write off an impartial media:
Preposterously pompous Adam Boulton on Sky News (every day - see how he is much softer on Remainers) (how is it elected representatives are labelled Leaver or Remainer when Journalists are not!)
Sally Bundock and Tim Wetherspoon BBC Business News Thursday 28th March constantly interrupting and seeking to prevent TW answering the questions she asked. Emily Maitlis on Newsnight the same day - same tactic.
Robert Peston interviews with Boris Johnson - RP virtually saying you are a "numpty" - in some respects true but it is poor Journalism.
Will Self - conflates what he calls ethnic nationalism with racism. He produces no evidence. He should read Eatwell and Goodwin for a much more reasoned and believable analysis rather than purvey his version of the world in such a superficial, supercilious, gesture ridden, sloganising way. But then he is only like many other commentators (they know who they are).
Probably the most important attributes of an independent, sovereign nation are:
a) its laws are made in that country and its Supreme Court determines outcomes according to domestic law;
b) it does not accept coercion or restraints in International Relations whether economic, political or heaven forbid military but operates on the basis of negotiated reciprocity;
c) its electorate and its representatives are genuinely inclusive - not as has been in the past preaching inclusivity whilst practising the opposite - see Tony Blair and most Conservative governments;
d) the electorate has to have confidence that it is being supported by its government and that government is not beholden to business and moneyed interests see Tony Blair and most Conservative governments.
Have a great weekend!

More EU games

The House of Commons rejects by massive majorities on two occasions the proposed Withdrawal Agreement. Now in search of avoiding blame for negotiations breaking down it says extend the BREXIT date. However what has not been identified by our supine and remainiac media (there are honourable exceptions) is that the EU continues to insist that the Withdrawal Agreement negotiated with PM May must stand in any settlement. Whilst a europhile and Remain voter I am not so delusional as many politicians on both sides of the Channel appear that this only delays the inevitable! The Withdrawal Agreement should be rejected again because:
a) a common sense interpretation of the so-called backstop is that a foreign power may effectively annexe part of our Union;
b) moreover since that is the case (ask any Irish Republican what is an acceptable solution to the problem and look for an answer?). Puerility reigns when the only answer you get is "the UK created the problem so it is up to them to find a solution".
c) the so-called divorce settlement has not been subject to rigorous examination - it is a fine!
d) Sovereign Countries have a Supreme Court which does exactly what it says on the tin - anything else such as proposed in the Withdrawal Agreement cannot be acceptable to independent sovereign countries.
This is yet another charade where to EU seeks to distance itself from blame when negotiations break down. When they do breakdown, as in most negotiations, both sides bear responsibility. In the UK PM May will resign but Barnier is likely to be promoted. Says it all really as to what sort of organisation the EU is!

Brexit – Will Parliament be both witless and spineless

As we reach the stage where decisions have to be taken rather than be avoided it is important to be clear.

1) Taking no deal off the table is a charade! We all know that there will be a deal what is not known is the exact content and when though; if Parliament and the EU have any sense it should be in a matter of weeks rather than months. (It really takes a massive leap of faith to believe this is any way helpful) (The PM’s incompetence has had the consequence of making Corbyn’s and Starmers’s policy believable - that shows how out of touch Parliament is)

2) Will delaying exit improve the relative position of either side to the negotiations and does this not mean more uncertainty for business. Without doubt delaying with no deal off the table gives much greater negotiating leverage to the EU. Whereas leaving with no deal puts the UK in a much stronger position! (and business can move ahead on that basis).

3) The EU is only interested in the UK having less economic freedom, continuing to receive £bn every year from the UK, enjoying unconditional security guarantees without payment and the UK being punished for the electorate exercising its democratic right!

4) If the Irish government was really interested in its country’s economic stability it would not have insisted on the so called “backstop” (in reality a full stop – grammarians will know the difference and it is significant!) gleefully grasped by the EU as another stick with which to beat the UK.

5) The EU has an almost fanatical attachment to the Single Market and its protection – this is is not politics nor business – its Theology – a very dangerous thing in negotiations.

6) If the “end game” is another referendum Parliament needs to think very carefully as to what it means for the future of our democracy (the elite says you got it wrong so have another go and get it right this time). Whether it would end the question – probably not. Would it unite or further divide the country – I think we know the answer to that!