Kier Starmer & Ed Davey are already taking their idea of securing change at the next Election seriously. So why isn’t anyone who wants real change in our political system doing the same?

Regrettably, a certain truth is that none of us will see or hear messages that we are not ready to see or hear, or that for some reason we want to avoid. This is especially so, when those messages are an uncomfortable truth that it suits our purposes to run away from.

No uncomfortable truth exists that is less uncomfortable for so many of us, than we have the idiots in politics and running the Country that we have, because we are the ones who made the choice to elect the politicians and all the political parties that we have already got.

Our memories are short. So short in fact, we have forgotten or overlooked that the political choices of the three mainstream parties or tribes that we have today are all the same. That these parties ultimately deliver the same thing. That it is only the branding, the words and the faces that actually change.

At election time, our interest in who the people really are who present themselves at our doorsteps promising this and promising that in exchange for our votes is breathtakingly short. As such, it has become all too easy to miss the reality that moving the cross that we mark on our ballot papers from one party or from one box to another, actually means that we are voting for the same things.

The same stories with the same unhappy endings for all of us are all wrapped differently and presented to us as change. But everything this political class does and believes is fundamentally the same – whether they are Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat in name.

Boris lies, they all lie. But when the time comes, will we opt to change anything?

If ever there was a time when more people are likely to become suspicious, it is during a period like now, when the experiences that we have been having at the hands of these charlatans over the past two years is leading to more and more of us to feel like we have started to wake up.

Those with power, sitting as MPs from all the Parties in our Parliament may well suspect that the tables are turning, even if they are too blind to understand why. They have much to lose if the system that feeds their self-interest collapses. They will do whatever they need to, to make sure that they can continue on behaving in exactly the same way.

So, when we see the news that Leader of the Labour Party Keir Starmer and Leader of the Liberal Democrats Ed Davey are working up a non-aggression pact for the next General Election, we should all be very concerned that the self-preservation powers of a dangerously self-serving political culture are already very hard at work.

Whatever Labour and the Liberal Democrats cook up between them in order to manipulate the outcome of any constituency vote when the next General Election comes, the outcome for us – whether Conservative, Labour, Lib Dem or any coalition government made up of the parties that we currently have, will inevitably be the same or even worse. That is, if they appear to be the only alternative to the Tory Government that we have currently got.

They will only appear to be the alternative to Johnson or whoever replaces him, if we don’t create the real alternative to all of them. Like Starmer and Davy are already doing – we need to be working on the creation and the development of that alternative RIGHT NOW!

Sadly, everyone who is out there and championing the fact that we need to have change, may well be one of those failing to understand that change will not just appear because we demand it.

Because with people in government today or at any time in the future who are fundamentally the same, with the same priorities and the same ways of manipulating everything at the level they are and have been doing blocking all the seats within our Parliament – the more things change, the more they stay the same.

You may not like to read or feel comfortable with what I am saying. But the chances are that you already know deep down that it is the truth.

The truth beyond that understanding of what the real problem with British Politics is now, is also that the kind of government that we need and that is worth having will not just arrive by chance. It will take a lot of very hard work.

The hard work that I am talking about is different. Different, because we are used to everything coming at us in politics from the top down.

This new politics must come from the grassroots and then go up. That is, if meaningful and beneficial change for us all is going to actually arrive at an election and then do all of its good work in the Parliamentary terms to come.

For as long as the narrative continues to be set by the same people that we have today, the same narrative will continue.

They may not be Johnson, Sunak, Truss or any other Tory buffoon. But Starmer, Davey and all of the politicians behind them are, think and stand for exactly the same – as well as a few well-known names leading other political groups and parties outside of parliament today too.

Because the shared rationale behind it all is built on self-interest, the direction of travel will be for things to become invariably worse, whatever happens next, without there being a genuine choice for change.

Every day that passes that the work to replace and provide a real alternative to all these clowns hasn’t begun, is a day nearer to us having up to five years more of the lack of understanding, the out of touch policies and a whole establishment regime that exists only to pursue what works only in its favour and best interests.

We need and we deserve a lot more. But the miracle won’t arrive until we have all done our bit to invite it into our lives and helped it start.

Your voice, your views, your experience are important.

Be part of the debate. Be part of the solution. Be part of what needs to start now.

Visit www.anewpartyforall.org

Advertisement

Q: Why are the Tories so far ahead in the Polls? A: Because there is no political alternative to what we have already got (SPOILER – THEY ARE ALL THE SAME!)

Yes, scoff or blow a raspberry if you like. Think to yourself ‘There is Labour’, ‘There are the Liberal Democrats’, ‘What about Reform UK – or whatever that Laurence Fox guy was doing?’ – And yes, I can assure you that there will be plenty more too.

But ask yourself this: What are any of these political parties and the people who speak on behalf of them doing differently to what we see in the behaviour of the politicians that we have in Government running the Country today? What can you remember seeing from them at any time before?

If your response to this focuses only on Covid. Lockdowns, Social Distancing or something involving the past 17 months, I have to suggest that you are probably not thinking all of this through. Certainly not to the point where you can begin to start using your anger, frustration and the energy to do something positive that might lead to change and make all the problems that Boris & Co are creating go away.

It doesn’t matter what political party you support right now or what political parties you might have supported in the past. There is a common theme running like a fat vein through them all. At their worst lies unbridled ambition and blind self-interest, and at best is a lack of self-awareness and understanding of the issues facing just about everyone else – which for politicians should be the only common cause.

For many who are waking up to the evolving crisis of democracy and tyrannical leadership that we have now found ourselves facing, there were no recognisable problems with British Politics before the pandemic began. But others have been watching this unfold for years, if not decades. A slow, malignant rot set in to our political system leaving political parties run purely for themselves and for their own benefit, recruiting multiple generations of politicians who do nothing that doesn’t prioritise their party, their own friends and themselves above all else.

Because this process has been underway for so long, we now have MPs, Councillors and Politicians of all kinds right from the bottom to the top of the tiers of government, who say yes to everything they are directed to by their parties, just to get known publicly, gain power and ultimately get to the top.

They are not leaders. All of our recent Prime Ministers have reached the top job in the same way. They have only been unscathed before now, because it was not until the unscripted result of the Brexit Referendum landed in 2016, that events stopped unfolding for them in a very helpful and otherwise publicly misleading way.

To be fair to David Cameron, it looks like once the result was in, he knew immediately that he was out of his depth and simply didn’t have the tools to maintain the charade any longer. Theresa May thought it looked as easy to run the Country from No10 as all other MPs do, but quickly fell fowl of the complexities of dealing with the nebulous and maleficent EU and its previous forms as all PMs after Churchill have done so too – the difference being that she did so after being instructed to leave, rather than having an unhealthy desire and the ability to do whatever possible to get us further in. Boris ‘gift’ – if we can call it that, is that he simply doesn’t give a shit about anyone else or what anyone thinks, so when it came to winning the 2019 General Election, he was more than happy to do whatever the people around him told him to do to win. The wheels fell off for this particular brand of allowing a Country to run itself when the Covid Pandemic came romping in.

When being in politics and gaining power at any cost is your only motivation from a ‘career’ perspective, or like Boris – a plan from a very early age, you simply do not have the right motivation to represent others. You will not willingly expose yourself to the channels, journeys and pathways of experience that those who get into politics with the sole motive of representing others will have genuinely obtained.

For those we elect to serve us, such experience is the basis of understanding how real life works and what the experience of life means to others, how life is lived and how decisions in government will always have consequences for everyone else. It is the lifeblood of effective representative government, and when the representatives we elect don’t have that life experience, then the consequences of that inadequacy are very serious for us all.

Covid tipped a runaway train off the tracks. All of the downsides of having the wrong people running the Country have now come into a very explosive public view.

But people – and by people I mean the majority of us who vote – are not the simpletons and village idiots that those now obsessed with keeping their power at any cost would like to believe.

Yes, there are many who do not, or cannot elucidate their feelings or challenge the people who lead us. But that does not mean they do not think for themselves or that they do not possess that all-important gut-feeling and the instinct that none of us trust nearly enough. Right now, it is telling a great many of us that everything we are now seeing and experiencing from Government in this Country is completely wrong.

No matter what MPs, Ministers, the Opposition Leader and all the others with a mainstream platform to talk about politics say, people know that there is no longer a genuine difference between any of the politicians we have. So, whatever way you vote, the results and what happens next will ultimately go the same way.

Yes, there are by-election blips. But don’t discount the ability of your fellow countrymen to get up, go out and visit the ballot box and use that very small moment of power they still have to give contemptuous politicians and those who aspire to control us a short, sharp message bloody nose, underlining how we feel about what they do.

There would be no alternative on the ballot papers to what we have already got running the Country if we were to have a general election today.

Whilst I may appear to have overlooked the Reclaims and the Reforms whose leaders will quickly tell you that they will be there whenever an Election is called, the reality is that these are political vehicles which are failing to connect with anywhere near enough people in the meaningful way that an alternative will need to, if it is to win and gain power and then stop and address the problems that decades of the wrong people being in power in this Country have caused.

Talking about and considering Elections right now is a lot more important than many people would like to think.

With the 80-seat majority that the Conservative Party has got right now, we are pretty much stuck with them doing whatever they want to. Without beating them at the next General Election, there is unlikely to be any other way to remove and replace them in a way that will work out well for us all.

We must create, build and develop an alternative political movement that reaches across and addresses all of the issues now, so that it is ready, connected and has meaning for everyone whenever the next General Election is called.

We have to work together to do this. We must be the alternative. We have to step up to the next level and work strategically to overcome the problems that Johnson and the inaction of all MPs has created.

There simply is no other way.

Still not voting…

GE2019

At the beginning of the Month, I wrote ‘No, I will not vote in an Election where there isn’t an option for change. Why would I?

With three weeks gone and two more to go until the Election on Thursday 12th December, I have to say that I feel very much the same.

It’s not that there hasn’t been any change. There has.

But the change that has happened has been peripheral or aesthetic at best.

The good that might come from the adjustments within the political landscape that have taken place within this Campaign will not have come about not by design or intention, but rather by default.

With 15 days to go, the biggest issue on everyone’s mind today, is the Interview that Jeremy Corbyn gave to Andrew Neil last night. It followed a day where Labour’s choreographed plan for a day focused on their ‘ambitious Race and Faith Manifesto’ was utterly destroyed by the article written by the Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis and published in yesterday’s Times, explaining exactly why people should redirect their vote.

The Interview itself simply evolved a terrible day into a complete nightmare for the Labour Leader as he effectively refused to apologise for the anti-Semitism within the Labour Party and what the Party has done in response.

The Tories are riding high. And with the latest polls now suggesting that the gap between the Conservatives and Labour is closing, the fall out from this debacle is almost certain to ensure that the polling will quickly start to go the other way.

Or at least that is until Boris sits in front of AF Neil himself whenever that might be agreed and then be.

The big problem is that the Conservatives are riding a wave that doesn’t have defining Public Policy as its root cause.

Labour’s downward trajectory and overkill with its great electoral giveaway of 2019 aside, the biggest boon to Boris Johnson’s position has been the decision from Nigel Farage to remove so many of the Brexit Party’s Candidates from competing against Tory Candidates in Seats where the Conservatives won in the 2017 Campaign.

On the face of it, Farage did this to avoid the risk of Jeremy Corbyn walking into No10.

Yet his hybrid approach of standing Brexit Party Candidates pretty much everywhere else does have the distinctive whiff of the whole effort the Brexit Party is making being not about Brexit itself, but about gaining at least a foothold of control.

The lie itself is given by Farage’s suggestion during the Press Conference at the time that Boris had done enough with the pledges he had made about Brexit in the video that had been released the day before.

To some, it will come as little surprise that recent days have brought stories to the fore, that Farage has no plans to go anywhere. That his next mission will be to rebrand the Brexit Party and transform it into a political vehicle that will drive political reform.

The problem for Farage with this is that apart from the reality he has to now face that as a figurehead and leader he is no longer likely to be trusted, any Party that can be identified as being about nothing else other than Leaving the EU itself is likely to be as divisive as Jo Swinson and the Liberal Democrats have been by rejecting the need to find a pathway that will bring all sides together and committing themselves to cancel Brexit and promise that under their influence the UK will categorically Remain.

To its credit, the Brexit Party has demonstrated that it is possible to bring people, politicians and pubic figures from all political backgrounds together to work as one.

But the ‘Contract’ that they have published instead of a manifesto for this General Election tells us that the leadership of the Party is still thinking about politics in exactly the same way as the leadership of all of the other Political Parties who have contributed to the political crisis that we are experiencing and not least of all the Brexit Divide.

We now look two weeks ahead to an Election Result where Boris is still likely one-way-or-another to be our PM.

But being PM with a majority that is likely to lead to a clean, no deal Brexit by default within 12 months is a lot different to the situation that Boris will face if he is returned as Prime Minister with similar numbers of MPs in Parliament to what we have experienced since 2017 – where the majority present is most likely to still be pushing for further delays, obfuscation and what they will only accept as being a very open form of Remain.

The chaos that follows any of the scenarios that appear to be likely and unfolding from this vantage point in time will not improve things. It is likely to only make things a whole lot worse.

Whilst I and many others would like to see reason for hope that any of the Political Parties we have today and running in this Election could become the catalyst for wide-ranging change, once we have brought everyone back together again by really getting Brexit done, I’m afraid that paying lip service to the change that the UK desperately now needs simply isn’t enough for me to vote for any Candidate or Political Party that is involved.

Labour’s Universal Basic Income is nothing but a temporary bridge across a black hole of a problem that none of the Parties understand or are prepared to deal with

89447a1c-d5a9-4158-b167-d12c506c5774The headlines this morning make painful reading to anyone who can see the real costs of The Labour Party’s plans and what they will involve.

Actually, it’s not the suggested figure of £1.2 Trillion over five years spent on public services that the real problem.

It’s the reality that this child-in-a-sweet-shop-with-birthday-money approach to fixing public services involves nothing more original than throwing money at the problems with no investment for the future or genuine long-term returns involved.

All well and good you might say if your only priority is to get a government elected and indefinitely keep that power.

But for the millions of British People who are experiencing the arse end of all that’s wrong in this Country each and every day, any positive impact from Labour’s great giveaway will be short lived once the default causes of all these societal ills have quickly bubbled back up to the surface again through the pile of vaporising money that these cynical left-wing politicians tell us they have in store.

The hollow promise that comes with a Universal Basic Income is the suggestion that poverty can be addressed as simply as giving everyone the same amount of money each month before spending on everything that life demands of us begins.

It’s a nice idea. And for people caught in a poverty trap with little or nothing, the promise of a lump of no-strings-attached cash each month is an electoral vote winner that is likely to go far.

If only life were really that simple.

The biggest problem that people on or below the poverty line in this Country face is not what income they have. It’s keeping control of the cost of everything that is essential to live, get by and to enjoy a basic or acceptable standard of living or quality of life.

Identifying the amount of money, or the combination of a Universal Basic Income payment plus any benefits that might be payable that are involved right now, today, doesn’t address the issue of what they will cost thereafter. Nor does it address the issue of how the real cost of living got to where it is today.

The reason for this is one of the greatest cultural ills of business today.

It is the exploitation of every opportunity to make profit wherever and whenever possible. Not because that’s what makes businesses work and function. But simply becuase the circumstances exist where they choose to because they legally can.

Too many profit hungry business owners, managers, shareholders, agents, financiers and speculators are taking too much money out of a system where there would otherwise be plenty that was affordable for all. They interrupt and place themselves within supply chains, production chains and service chains without adding any value to the process themselves – and this process often happens more than once.

Gandhi once said that ‘Earth provides enough to satisfy every mans need, but not every mans greed’. Our politicians clearly don’t read and if they did, they certainly don’t listen.

Whilst an argument can be made that Labours Election Manifesto includes a plan to re-nationalise essential public industries such as power, water and rail, the reality that they have no plans to address the institutional problems that exist within the Public Sector mean that the profits currently being sucked out of these industries by private shareholders will simply be redistributed to other destinations of a self-serving kind, whilst the service itself and cost to users will progressively get even worse whilst costing us all even more.

Addressing the cost and regulating the freedom of the private interests that you can never realistically remove from all manufacturing and production, services and supply, to charge whatever they want for goods and services that are essential to providing a basic quality of life for us all, should therefore be the primary aim of any political party that really wants to improve life.

It should be a simple task for politicians who genuinely care and intend to lift the poorest in society out of the circumstances that are a vicious circle that condemn them to want, debt and an experience of life that nobody in the 21st Century UK should ever have.

Labour, the Liberal Democrats, the Conservatives – in fact none of the Political Parties we have on offer to us as Voters today, really have any idea nor understanding of how the monetary system works. Yet they are obsessed with monetary theory.

They don’t know how business operates. But they believe themselves qualified to regulate or deregulate at will.

They certainly have no appreciation of how technology is not only destroying and dehumanising relationships. But is also making the ability of the unscrupulous to exploit others and the vulnerable easier than it ever has been before.

The people or so-called politicians that we already have and that we are about to elect again in December are not fit to rule over us. They have no idea of what the problems facing this country really are and how they affect people of all demographics and backgrounds. They have no vision of how those problems can be addressed. And they certainly have no idea of what they really need to do to begin solving any of them.

Until we have politicians and leaders in this country who do see, understand and are prepared to do whatever it is that is necessary to deal with the issues that this Country faces, the fuckwits that we have in power will play around only with what they perceive to be the problems that others outside the Westminster bubble face, whilst what amounts to their tinkering makes everything everyone else is experiencing a whole lot worse.

 

Corbyn had a bad day yesterday. But the truth will be no friend to the Conservatives as a result

1b1adc77-5377-4d68-a64f-9ec227c66d16Wow. What a day that was.

Within the space of less than 24 hours, Tom Watson, the Deputy Leader of the Labour Party stood down, The Jewish Chronicle outs its view of the Labour Party under Corbyn on its front page and Ian Watson, a Labour Minister under Gordon Brown interviews on National Television stating that the current Labour Leader isn’t fit to rule and that People should vote for Boris Johnson instead.

But what difference will it all really make?

The answer the Conservatives will not want to hear is probably not a lot.

During normal times, an individual of Jeremy Corbyn’s nature, background and ideals would not be Leader of the Opposition, let alone be less than 5 weeks away from the possibility of being UK Prime Minister and walking straight into No10.

But the times we live in are far from normal. And the reality that disillusioned Labour MPs may well have nominated and voted Corbyn into the Labour Leadership in 2015 for little more than a laugh will make no difference in the hindsight of history.

Indeed, we will surely look back on the Electorate’s 6-week interview and assessment of Marxism as an applicant for the job of driving the direction of the next government in the final months of 2019 as just being a sign of the times.

The politicians we have today bear a significant amount of the responsibility for the rise and presence of what we call fake news.

In fact, we have been on the receiving end of decades of spin. And whilst the Establishment continually tries to make us believe that fake news is only the preserve of those outside the mainstream, of extremists and of the Russians or perhaps the Chinese, the past three years since the European Referendum has been a master class from Politicians and the mainstream media in this Country of how to push nothing but opinion – and have it passed off successfully as being the truth.

Fake news now flows through every media channel to the point where for a growing number of people no difference actually exists between falsehood and truth.

For many, reality in politics has become all about what resonates best, what makes sense or what suits or most closely fits the listeners experience and view of the world.

Then there are the young, who inexperienced in the dark ways of the world and therefore idealist by nature, don’t look beyond the instant hit that comes from a sound bite or a picture that is painted with impractical idealism and represents what they sincerely believe can be achieved and is therefore what they would like to see.

They don’t consider the detail.

They don’t have any idea what delivering these ideas and manifesting them in reality would actually involve.

They certainly don’t anticipate or understand the consequences of what they might be calling for and the pain that waving a magic policy wand in isolation will almost certainly cause.

But then why should young people be expected to know and understand any of this when the narrative from politicians other than those like Corbyn tell them that Conservatives and those like them look on young people as being of little value, that they have nothing to bring to the party, and that they should shut up and do whatever they are told.

Against this backdrop, the narrative that Corbyn peddles is intoxicating to many of the People in this Country who are already politically disenfranchised and to an even greater proportion of the young.

The truth of what Jeremy Corbyn is, what he represents and what he might soon have the power to inflict upon us all is someone else’s news, someone else’s truth.

It has no currency to those who have no reason to trust the Establishment. Especially when the solution that Corbyn is selling offers an instant high with absolutely none of the disadvantages or responsibilities that following out-of-touch old people, boomersgammon or the elite would involve.

So whilst the Tories might be looking at the papers and the news feeds today and thinking that this Election Campaign is quickly becoming little more than a slam-dunk, they should perhaps take a step back and consider the fact that they have helped to create the environment in the UK today. A place where People right across the Electoral spectrum will be weighing up the pros and cons of all the Political Parties and all the Candidates without anything like the normal rationality that Conservative Politicians assume will always be involved.

The funny thing is that the outcome of this Election is most likely to materialise simply by default.

Nothing that any of these politicians are saying or doing stands out as being any different  to what We have heard in the past or is encouraging voters – whether young or old – to vote in any way differently to what it would, in the circumstances, be logical to expect.

If Boris Johnson and the Tories really want the truth to matter in the future elections that they might still be able to fight, they need to start talking to, interacting with and considering everyone beyond their own kind differently.

But first and before they do that, they should really take a good hard look at themselves.

 

Welcome to the Labour Party’s land of lost opportunity where nothing more than anger and the lowest common denominator rules

Any of us could fall into the trap of believing that that MPs from different Political Parties cannot be the same.

But they are all driven by the same self-interest, lack of real-world understanding, unbridled lust for power and manifested ineptitude.

All of which leads them to believe that their own narrow view of the world from the confines of the Westminster bubble means they can create whatever policy they like in isolation. That anything they haven’t thought of that connects to it in some way will just go on existing, untouched as before, and very much the same.

The ideas we hear from MPs from different Parties look and sound different. Their implications might appear to be very different too. But the end result or bottom line is that the madness coming from irresponsible people running our lives through government is, has and will continue to affect and hurt all of us – often in ways we cannot imagine – until we actually begin to suffer and experience the pain.

Irrespective of whatever the policy, its aim or the way it is sold to us might be, if it has not been conceived and created on the basis of doing what is right for everyone through its implications and consequences in both the short and longer term, the outcomes from that policy will always end up being wrong

Welcome to the Political world and culture that created Brexit.

That’s decades of poorly made, ill-considered and fundamentally flawed political decision making from politicians and MPs from all sides. The irresponsibility of self-interested glory seekers and careerists that have no respect for the the dynamics of cause and effect, the age of consequences that they have helped to create, nor the way that the relationship between public representative and the public they represent should be.

In these, The death throws of this old politics, the policies of all our Political Parties appear to be becoming more and more bold.

But whilst the Conservatives are trying to out Brexit the Brexiteers and the Lib Dems are planning to erase the whole thing like nobody would respond to it’s loss, it’s The Labour Party that again responds by taking a hammer and sickle to domestic institutions and policy as part of their own polarising attempt to suggest that they are the only Party that exists to benefit everyone.

Whilst education policy in this country is failing many of the young people within our schools, colleges and universities, the impact of that failure is one that has a considerable implications for us all.

Yet any policy that seeks to remove the differences that exist between everyone, just because our lives and circumstances will always be different, will not create a culture where everyone has the opportunity to do as well as they can, no matter how they start out or what they might be given.

Such mindless destruction will just create an experience for everyone that is dumbed-down, without aspiration, motivation or any of the benefits being available to anyone whether rich or poor, that are most often the guiding light that is shared by all.

Socialism’s failure is its inability to recognise there is a capitalist present within us all. The moment it did, Socialism would not exist.

Genuine equality of opportunity will not be created by destroying differences in infrastructure and driving the whole system that nurtures it towards the floor.

Equality of opportunity for all will be delivered by recognising the differences and reasons for reduced access to those opportunities that exist. By working around them with care and consideration for what will really work practically. And without any idealistic thinking that suggests you can simply change rules and then everything will suddenly look and feel the same.

But these Labour politicians and all of those like them don’t worry about what is best for all.

Their paucity of responsible thinking demonstrates a lack of creativity and with it consideration for why they were elected.

They all demonstrate a complete lack of respect for anyone other than themselves and the ideas they think will ultimately give them more of whatever they personally want.

There is no desire, no aim, no motivation amongst any of today’s political class to create a society where policy exists considering quality and experience of life, giving real opportunity for everyone who needs it and with it the opportunity of something better for all.

Labour’s new policy to destroy private schools represents the politics of greed and of envy. Where everyone other than themselves and those they recognise as their own can pay the real price.

These inept MPs are the people who already have more. And more always wants more.

But as usual, it’s all of us outside of their bubble who will bear the burden of the true cost.

Want a real Brexit and Corbyn kept out of No.10? – A General Election is now the only way…

images-2Coverage of the result of the Peterborough By-Election actually felt different. Maybe even a little odd. But perhaps prescient of the direction our Politics is now going – a place where there is no control or script and it all seems to be in the hands of the gods.

Within hours of this blog being published, the gurus of political interpretation will have of course broken the whole thing up and began spinning it into many different, but for them, primarily self-serving ways. However, the reality will nonetheless remain underneath it all that Politics in this Country has changed and things are never going to be the same again.

Yet the politicians refuse to see it.

They are still looking at everything coming at them through the lens of the old politics – and yes, I’m even including the Brexit Party as being one of them in this instance too.

To perhaps understand this a little better, it is important to consider the Peterborough result.

Yes, the Labour Candidate was Elected. But the Brexit Party Candidate wasn’t far behind them and it would be foolish to frame the Conservative Candidate’s 3rd place as being outside of the same room.

Somewhere, probably in London today, different conversations will be taking place around the realities of what can be gleaned from the way the vote was split.

Some of this thinking will simply be deluded. Some of it will be based on outright fear. But what will be common among all of it will be the view that the problem is outside of the Politicians hands, outside of their Party’s control and that it will be something or someone else who is getting it all wrong.

With the Peterborough result for these three Political Parties and the wider Westminster Polls being dispersed between them and the Liberal Democrats as they are, you can bet that the debate will end up for many of them concluding that First Past The Post is now redundant and should be replaced by some other form of electoral system that will benefit the de facto righteousness of their position – such as PR.

What they fail to observe, or deliberately overlook and therefore do not accept, is the reason that none of them – even with Brexit involved – is offering the leadership, vision and inspiration that is necessary to formulate the public policy that the People now want and is required of our Politicians and their Parties not just for Brexit, but as we step off into a world based on A New Politics beyond.

Playing around with the Electoral System will only benefit the Political Parties and the Politicians themselves.

It will sure up, consolidate and in some cases expand their presence and position.

But the upshot is that the opportunity to provide the kind of decisiveness and defining leadership that we now need in British Politics more than ever, will simply be lost.

Brexit and the future of this Country requires good leadership and the decisiveness that goes with it by the truckload. Without it the mess we are now in is set to get a whole lot worse.

What Politicians should understand from the results and polling as they are, is that no Political Party is currently capable of commanding a working majority in Parliament.

Without a working majority, neither Brexit nor anything substantial in terms of the changes to and creation of new Policy that our People now need is going to be addressed in any meaningful and lasting way. That simply has to change.

The biggest risk to Brexit and to our Democracy –  make no mistake that the two are now intricately linked – is that the new Conservative Leadership will continue onwards and go all out to enable a No Deal Exit from the EU by 31st of October – just so the Conservative Party can claim that they have achieved and can take ownership of that result.

If the current Parliamentary dynamic doesn’t stop them before they do so, there is a storm cloud awaiting them on the other side. Because it is there that the Remain majority in Parliament – if it has not been changed – will have an incredibly hard stick to beat the Government with, and the ability to make serious hay from the sunshine that they will see pouring over them from the inevitable problems that will follow a No Deal Brexit that has been executed in this specific way.

Taking the UK back into the EU on the turnaround of a sixpence is not something that any Political Party with designs or long term aspirations on being the natural party of government is going to want to do. Especially when the straightjacket that the UK will have no choice but to accept as part of a completely one-way and loaded bargain will inevitably become poison for whoever was to blame – irrespective of the Politicians who were actually involved.

The only way out of this problem is to recognise Party boundaries and tribal loyalties as the ties that bind all of todays MPs to the politics of old. The old politics that the public are telling them is not only flawed but is fundamentally wrong.

Our Politicians must come together to deliver on the issues. And the issue which is the doorway to solving all other issues is Brexit – whether our Politicians like that fact or not.

The People Voted for the UK to Leave the EU without any deal or ties. Giving us anything less will simply be wrong. This includes coming out of the EU and then taking us immediately back in, whilst MPs then sell their ineptitude and lacklustre attempts at managing the Process as evidence that the whole thing was wrong.

The only Political Parties that have the ability to coagulate around the fact, reality and message that a full and proper Brexit must happen are the Brexit Party and the Conservative Party. And it is within the Conservative Party where the real struggle is still taking place, as it has been all along.

The new Conservative Prime Minister must accept and then immediately act on the fact that without a General Election and securing the Brexit MP Majority that it will give them if they ask for Public support in the right way, the future is effectively lost.

To realise and achieve the alternative – which is a real and permanent Brexit, there is no option for the next Conservative Party Leadership other than to swallow their pride for the greater good and work with the Brexit Party to establish a ‘Grand Brexit Coalition’.

Working together these Political Parties can provide that Brexit Majority and then ensure that our Brexit and the great future that follows it will for all of us be secure.

If they fail to do so, the future is very bleak. It is one that revolves around Corbyn and his Marxist tentacles reaching out and destroying everything we value from No.10.

The cost to everyone in this Country from allowing this to happen will go way beyond the destruction of the Conservative Party. It will simply be too high.

Isn’t it time the Conservative Leadership put the requirements of real Leadership first and did whatever necessary to get the job done?

 

image thanks to unknown

Corbyn has the ability to win, not because of what he does, but because of what others don’t

img_2576One of the greatest misinterpretations of recent weeks has been the ongoing assessment of the media and the Labour Party that Jeremy Corbyn is sat on the fence and will not commit to anything.

Granted, much of the commentary on the Labour Leader is reflective of his role or non-role in the Brexit process.

But looks are deceiving.

Corbyn’s letter to Theresa May this week tells us all a lot more than we realise about the game that for him is now in play.

Yes, the commentariat and opinionati are busy reflecting on the content and generally overlooking the reality that it beats May at her own game when it comes to achieving a Brexit which is not actually based on leaving but very much Remain.

But even less attention is being paid to the more strategic angle of not only this letter, but everything that Jeremy Corbyn does. All of which is clearly developing around creating the circumstances under which he would be able to facilitate the installation and then implementation of a Marxist regime.

Oh we’d see that coming if it was ever really a threat is the very kind of response you would get from anyone who is taking Corbyn’s chances of becoming PM less than seriously.

Yet nobody in power now has control over the outcome of events and what Brexit might really become.

Memories are short. And whilst we may never know or understand what the Labour MPs directly involved were thinking when they nominated Corbyn as a leadership candidate following the resignation of Ed Milliaband, we can be reasonably sure that they did not bank on what have already been the consequences and what may now become.

Indeed the magnitude of that original decision must have become painfully obvious for them when Corbyn then went on to see off a leadership challenge, just as the momentum movement ushered in by his accession have began to take over everything Labour as they have become increasingly involved.

Today, what normal people see as the quantum leap which would be Jeremy Corbyn becoming Prime Minister is a threat that is very real. Not because of anything specific or particularly good about what he does.

But as then, right back at the point that he was first nominated to be Labour Leader. Simply because the threat is neither cognicised or taken seriously by some, whilst others are too busy trying to exert control over everything else to achieve their own plans, to see that their own inaction as the flip side of their actions will have very serious consequences for all involved.

You can do the right things at the right time or you can live with the consequences from that point thereafter.

Right now, Corbyn has his eye on a prize which is not entering into common thought.

Whilst there is occasional mention of his aim of a socialist state – often in the same breath as mention of the unfolding tragedy created by his fellow socialists in Venezuela, nobody is really contemplating how this idealist could precipitate the transition from our capitalist democratically now to the Marxist nirvana where he would like us to be.

Corbyn’s letter gives reality to what may be both hope and genuine intention for the UK to go over a cliff edge as a result of Brexit at the end of March, in the circumstances that a completely unplanned ‘no deal’ scenario should unfold.

For the student and believer of revolution that Corbyn is, the prospect of civil unrest and the chaos that he believes would be guaranteed to accompany it, an out of control Brexit ushers in the opportunity to seize power whilst the wheels of government screech to a halt and anarchy has the potential to rule the streets.

What his plan, vision or desire doesn’t consider is that the socialist revolutions upon which he has based his goals have never been a sure thing, even when hindsight has allowed the victors to write the history.

Even the greatest communist takeover we know of, the Russian Revolution of 1917 was very much touch and go when it began. It could so easily have ended up very differently with minor changes in events and if the key players involved had made different choices and done different things.

That the majority of our MPs now function within a Westminster bubble where inaction, reaction, self-interest and fear driven decision making could take us over the edge in just 49 days is concerning.

How they would then react if the Marxist Corbynites should find themselves in the position to even try and spring anything remotely akin to a revolution from our Streets is a completely different thing.

Corbyn finds the project of chaos desirable at any cost, because the chances of him securing the outright or majority electoral victory which would allow him at least 5 years in government with the mandate to destroy the Western version of the UK and replace it with ‘socialism done properly’ are actually very remote indeed.

He is therefore dependent upon others not doing their job and breaking the rules to stop him when he and his kind would be prepared to. The very time that good leaders lined up against his plan would know and act on the fact that they should.

The realities of a Corbyn majority Marxist government are something that must be avoided and any chance that he might have to grab power outside the process of our democratic convention, must be avoided at all costs.

For if the point should now come where the British People feel justified in taking to the Streets, what could be for them a genuine protest against the ineptitude, ignorance and irresponsibility of the so-called representatives who have worked proactively over 2 and a half years to destroy democracy just to prevent a real Brexit, could quickly be hijacked and used to introduce a type of governance which will be insecure and therefore brutal.

We should never underestimate what to all of us would be the true cost.

The question we should perhaps be asking ourselves, is whether there are any Politicians left in Westminster who can see any of the wider, but nonetheless very real risks to this Country that are now unfolding. And if they can, would they or are they indeed capable of being the leaders we will need to stop a doomsday scenario unfolding at the hands of idealists, no matter what might be the personal cost?

We need a new Parliament and we need it NOW. The problem is this shit show of a self serving party political system which means democracy won’t easily be recovered

We are being fucked by our own Parliament. Right now. Today. And our MPs are so blinded by their own arrogance that they cannot see any other way.

Action taken by MPs in recent days seeking to dictate a form of Brexit that the People did not Vote for and now even the Speaker of the House of Commons breaking with Procedure to ensure outcomes which are aligned with his causes that are only his own tells us just how rotten this Parliament has now become.

The destiny of this Country is now in the hands of usurpers. Their only focus being what works for them and no more.

Democracy is actively in its death throws over Brexit right now and as we look at the mindless self-interest engulfing our Government, we can only ask if this behaviour of the people who are supposed to be leading us is a real reflection of what we as a Nation have now become.

We need to change and refresh our Parliament as quickly as it is possible to do so.

We must replace the self-interest and contempt for democracy which is being displayed in every way by the current incumbents. We need politicians who realise, accept and respect that what is best for this Country and the People they represent, is as Representatives of the People, their only worthwhile cause.

The problem is that change within the system as it currently exists is not what on is offer, even within what may now be an imminent General Election.

The difference in the mentality of the Politicians who would replace all of these Party stooges, even if they were to step down voluntarily, is simply not there to be had.

With the Party Political System and the Political Parties structured today in the way that they are, we, as a Country, have been set up to fail.

The Political Parties only knowingly recruit, endorse and support politicians who are in their own image.

If you need to see what the end result of this process is in action, take a brief look at Theresa May and every Member of her glory-at-any-cost Cabinet. It is clear to see why change is needed so desperately and how our whole system of democracy has become terminally flawed.

The deck is critically stacked against any new entrant to the list of electable political parties who will willingly pursue change. Of that much we can be absolutely sure.

Yet we now need a new Political Party more than ever.

A Party which isn’t just a Party, but a movement. A new way of working with Government and Politics. Something conscious of cause and effect, the age of consequence. A power base which is in touch, truly dynamic and ready to offer us all something which is a whole lot more.

There are few serving politicians even at Westminster who could genuinely switch or reconstitute an existing Party in order to develop the right mentality and approach at the very core.

The question is for us exactly where is the change therefore going to come from. Because without it, this Country is on the verge – that’s perhaps only weeks away – from being well and truly lost.

Splitting the Conservative Party may soon be the only hope for Democracy in the UK

The idea that a new political party will be the cure to all ills in politics is not a new one.

As I have written at length before, the way that the Electorate interacts with British Politics doesn’t lend itself well to what the Establishment portrays as outsiders. Unless that is there is an issue at work over which the Establishment does not have control.

We only need look to the rise and fall of UKIP and it’s inextricable link to the EU Referendum and then Brexit itself to understand what happens when the Establishment has dropped the ball – whether for good or bad.

For decades there has been an embedded form of monopoly in politics held between the Conservative and Labour Parties, with the Liberal Democrats and its previous forms being held up or utilised from their position which is mislabelled as being between.

Breaking open this racket has been all but impossible for what seem to be very simple, but nonetheless seemingly impossible challenges to answer. Many have tried. Some have had significant bank balances to enable them to do so. But even when UKIP gained around 4 Million votes in the last General Election, it was simply the case that there was no new parliamentary real estate for them to be found.

In as succinct terms as possible, there has existed an unwritten and assumed covenant between Electors and the Elected, which has benefitted this triumvirate mode.

The purpose and responsibility of being a representative of the people, both given and received at the ballot box was understood.

A reverence and trust for politicians has been the default standard for all politicians in the psyche of the Electorate.

That is unless there has been some big scandal, usually focused on the actions of an individual politician rather than the Party itself, and once removed, the default position would quickly be resumed.

All, that is, until the straw arrived that broke this heavily burdened camels back. A straw which came in the form of a decision being tossed back over to the Public, after which the Establishment simply assumed the status quo would be returned once more.

The problem with that decision, the decision for the UK to leave the EU had its genesis in the inference that this was a choice too big to be left to the delegated powers of our MP’s alone. For a decision with such implications, the Electorate itself would be trusted with the choice, and once that choice was made, their decision would be delivered and not returned – as that itself would bring into question what the very purpose of the Referendum had actually been for.

Overnight the lines of that once apparently straightforward interaction between the Public and Politicians was overturned. Instead of Voters who are typically Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat or of a mind to sit on the borders located in between, there has emerged a new understanding and assessment of our Political Masters which rather than being fluid between 3 or maybe even more possibilities, has now become a binary choice – only presented as being many others and not least of all, the direction of either Leave or of Remain.

But as with everything that relates to the human condition, it is far from being even that simple and the options which relate to those choices are now unlikely to ever be viewed by voters as being anything like the same.

That choice itself when it comes to appointing the representatives of the people, is now between electing Politicians who represent only themselves, and electing Politicians who represent us all.

The dividing line is democracy itself.

Not party lines or any kind of political philosophy.

This is about the choice of our elected representatives being to work unquestionably for others, or working for oneself and the accumulation of position, status and wealth for personal gain plus more.

This dichotomy is not false. Politicians can only have one master. It’s the Electorate or their own ideas, party and dreams.

The insidious nature of this dynamic crosses across all of our Political Parties, but it is within the Conservative Party where the divide between the two principles has now become so very clear, that the change that many of us for so long have been advocating, may have finally found the right place and time to actually gain traction and the process of creating a new electable party which puts voters first in every sense and can command a majority wherever it runs, can finally begin.

No, I don’t for one minute think that the Tory Party will split whilst they seem to be in power, simply because until it is set in stone that the Party can no longer win anything in its current form, there remains a chance, albeit a very slim one, that sanity is restored and comes in the form of those who vote only for themselves recognising the change in the Electoral terrain and what its true purpose is for.

But when the point comes that the Conservative Party in May’s image hits the buffers – which if the current chaos and uncertainty continue it inevitably soon will, there will come a point where all the Conservative MP’s who make up the subsequent wreckage will have the opportunity to return true democracy to the UK once more.

Small decisions have BIG consequences: How the outcome of the Brexit process could resemble nothing anyone intended or anything that has already been seen

small decisions

One of the biggest items of fake news reaching our screens and pages right now, is the idea, suggestion and misconception that Brexit must now come back to the People in another Referendum or ‘Peoples Vote’ to somehow make it legitimate or fair.

On 23rd June 2016, the majority of Voters taking part in the European Referendum, a genuine ‘Peoples Vote’ instructed the UK Government that our collective and democratic decision was to Leave Membership of the European Union (EU).

Contrary to repeated suggestions by many parts of the Remain camp and actions such as making challenges in the Courts and distorting the facts underlining both the Leave and Remain Campaigns and what has taken place since, the Vote was fair. The Leave result was genuine. And yes, 17.4 Million members of the Electorate of this Country did know what leaving the EU means.

However, an outcome is rarely an event in itself.

An outcome is usually the sum total of a chain of many different events or decisions leading to them, which can result in the outcome itself looking, feeling or being nothing like what the original decision directed. The result could resemble something far from what was was intended, and what it should have meant, simply because of decisions, influences and actions that enter the chain in between.

In normal life, this evolutionary process is often natural, influenced by many factors added on the way along, which are not intended on the part of anyone involved. They sit completely outside of our control and often lead to outcomes very different to what had been at any point planned or intended, but the result is overlooked, because the non-contrived and unforeseen parts of life have been introduced to the picture as we have travelled through.

Where things go wrong, particularly where big, political decisions are made, is that when a clear outcome from a process is defined, somebody or many somebodies either deliberately, or indeed unintentionally attempt and perhaps succeed in exerting influence on the process leading to that outcome.

They take action which ultimately leads things to a very different place from where they should have by that point have been, whether part of the legitimate plan, or whatever was their own. Different, because whatever the intention, once an action has been undertaken, the consequences in such circumstances are often completely out of anyones control.

Brexit is one such outcome. An outcome which is likely to look very different to what was intended when people Voted for it and equally very different to what those who have been trying to frustrate it have been intending ever since.

Whilst we obsess about the future and what we think will happen, we habitually base our predictions on the snapshot of now. We overlook the events which contributed or created the pathway which brought us to this point in time right now, which with different decisions and influences could have already looked very different indeed.

We also overlook what pandering to the noisy fears of idealistic people without vision or responsibility could deliver in terms of the final destination, if the real priorities of our EU departure are not kept in mind and the direction of travel kept patently clear.

Brexit, and the decision which demands its delivery in its genuine sense, wasn’t simply created on that night when the Votes of the EU Referendum were counted in June 2016.

But just as the UK Leaving the EU as the result of a Referendum wasn’t foreseen in the days of Thatcher, it doesn’t now mean that there is a trouble-free license to interfere with, redirect or invalidate the will of the British people when it comes to delivering the Brexit process, by manipulating the pathway to delivery at every opportunity in between.

Looking back on the events since the UK joined what was the Common Market, it is worth considering since the last days of the Thatcher Government, how each event and small decision surrounding Government has resulted in the cumulative outcome which is Brexit today.

The Brexit result did not come about by design although many Leavers would now leverage the benefit of hindsight to say ‘We told you so’.

Yes, there was every reason to believe that the UK would ultimately exit the European Union through some kind of fracture like an economic crash or the destruction of the Euro. But nobody either within the Leave contingent or the Remain-led Establishment itself really thought it would be a democratic plebiscite which would drive a wholly different, yet legitimate wedge between the UK and Membership of the EU.

The point to consider, whether your bias is Leave or Remain, is that no matter the nature or motivation of your intention, when you interfere with a process or take a course of action where you are attempting to dictate the outcome, you can neither predict nor control what the final result or outcome will actually be.

These words of caution are aimed at anyone who is, has or will attempt to manipulate the pathway or destination of Brexit.

Brexit is a genie that is completely out of its bottle and the result of all the bad choices, deliberate deceptions and meddling is going to take the UK to a destination which has not been anticipated, cannot be controlled and will never again resemble a place in the World where even recently we may have been.

The first real divide which resembled what we now know as Leave and Remain found its genesis at the time of the Thatcher Government.

The fractures came about because of the way that what we now know as the EU has been constructed, how it operates and how so little about its modus operandi is understood.

The pathway, often littered with wholly pro-EU acts on the part of Prime Ministers and their Cabinet Colleagues who should have known better, ultimately led to the Brexit Vote result. An outcome that was never the Establishment’s intention.

If you want to give thought to how Brexit could now play out as a result of the fractures and differences in ideas between people who should now be focusing on what we have in common, rather than the temporary ideas that we do not, this is probably the best place to begin.

The European Referendum Vote was the opening of the door and the outcome of a chain of many different events.

It wasn’t an instruction for MP’s or other people with Establishment influence to try and negotiate the steps that we take to get out.

The Result was a call to action. The Vote was a command. The outcome was a clear instruction that we Leave and only then review what remains between the UK and the EU. We the Electorate had no reason to doubt that it would be delivered in a way which would be fair, transparent and above all would be diligently true to that instruction.

Here follows a look at the Chain of events which led to the European Referendum result; to May’s tenure, and to a future which is far from certain.

Just as the events discussed and speculated upon before the EU Referendum led to the requirement of a Brexit outcome, the impact and consequences of the events and outcomes that have followed leave us today in the position that we cannot be sure of what will come to pass. That is before anything else is decided or done, and the choices which lead to those decisions and actions may be small, or they may appear to be large.

PLEASE NOTE: The following has been written as a way of provoking thought about events and outcomes that have happened compared to what could have been if different decisions had been made and subsequent actions taken. It is not a suggestion that any of the circumstances outlined would definitely have happened if different choices had actually been made. It also doesn’t consider the impact of the many other options which those involved had, or the events and outcomes that did and could have influenced any one or indeed all of the events as they appear in this inexhaustive list.

 1990

Margaret Thatcher ‘Regicide’ by the Conservative Party Europhiles

‘No, No, No’ seems like ancient history now. But many of us overlook the key event to the creation of the schism between Conservatives who at any other time would be friends.

Like all of our new, ambitious and confident Prime Ministers since, Margaret Thatcher underestimated the resolve and deviousness of the EU to achieve their long-term aim of a European Superstate through a drip-drip-drip strategy built on ‘no-return’ for each and every power transferred to the Brussels based autocratic centre.

When the point came for Mrs Thatcher, when she knew things had already gone too far, many of her closest Cabinet Members had already gone ‘Euro-native’. They were committed to this supranational, undemocratic ideal and were unwilling to support the Prime Minister in doing anything to turn things around.

The key players in bringing down the last real Tory PM, such as the still vocal Michael (now Lord) Heseltine, didn’t themselves gain the Conservative Party Leadership as part of this first of many disengaging and disenfranchising processes with the public.

Instead, under the typical Europhile appearance of compromise, the post was given to one of the biggest pro-Europe Conservatives we have ever seen.

What if different decisions had been made: It is easy to look back and assume that things would have been different if Maggie had stayed. She may well have given us the Referendum that her successor never did before the Maastricht Treaty was signed and in 1991 or 1992. She could have easily secured the solid working majority Commons that Major was not destined to do. But after 11 years of Leadership including 3 General Election Wins, a war in the Falklands and many battles with the EU and domestically back home, we can only wonder if she had the energy and clout left to take the Conservatives into another Term. As any eurosceptic who was around at the time would honestly tell you, the public at large were not at that point really awake to the creeping control and danger presented by the then version of the EU, and it’s impact had not arrived in ways that put the issue firmly in people’s minds.

John Major ‘Crowned’ PM

In what seemed like an unexpected choice to those watching on from a distance, the open warfare in the Conservative Party following Margaret Thatcher’s ejection from Office led to the Election of what appeared to be a compromise candidate – John Major.

Coming immediately from the post of Chancellor, Major had just overseen the entry of the UK into the EU’s Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM), the precursor to the Single Currency or ‘Euro’.

What if different decisions had been made: Although a growing element of the Parliamentary Conservative Party was becoming increasingly suspicious of the direction of EU travel, few had the understanding that Thatcher had belatedly obtained. The appearance of a split in the philosophical framework of the Conservative Party made what was sold as compromise in the selection of a replacement for Margaret Thatcher all but inevitable. John Major had a track record at Cabinet level, what was at the time seen as being an essential qualification for the ‘top job’. Another Conservative Leader could have been Elected, but Thatcher was likely to have been the only Leader capable of taking on the EU at that time. She was not supported by the ‘big beasts’ to do so, so any new Leader who was in anyway Eurosceptic was going to have a very troubled time. 

1992

Maastricht Treaty

John Major’s ‘big moment’ was committing the UK to the Maastricht Treaty in early 1992.

What if different decisions had been made: The significance of Maastricht along the road to surrendering more and more power to the EU cannot be overstated. It is arguably true that this was a point when a Referendum on Membership should have been held.

We cannot be sure that a Vote at this point would have gone against remaining and therefore further committing to the EU or that the result would have instructed Major’s Government to Leave.

With three distinct groups present in the European Membership debate i.e. those who are blindly committed to the EU superstate, those who don’t care or aren’t really sure what any of it’s about and those who are against it, it is reasonably safe to argue that in 1992, the deck was still stacked to what we now know as ‘Remain’.

Members of the second group are always more likely to endorse the status quo, whatever direction that might be.

If Major had gone to the People, what question would he have asked? Was it even possible to ask a question which wouldn’t then have created a debate in which the ‘European Dream’ could not therefore last?

As it was, Major doubled down and used every trick in the politicians handbook to push greater commitment to the EU through, ironically outing the Euroscpetics as ‘Bastards’ for using the same methods that he was too.

General Election

Major’s Conservatives win an unexpected, but wafer thin majority.

What if different decisions had been made: Neil Kinnock, then Labour Leader and perhaps an even bigger Europhile than John Major would have made it into No.10. Significant tranches of EU assimilation policy such as Devolution/Regionalisation may well have made it onto the Statute book sooner. We may not have been taken out of the ERM, which in turn could have committed us to losing the Pound and gaining the single currency. Labour may never have had John Smith or Tony Blair as Leaders. We could have had a Tory Government again at the end of Kinnock’s first Term in 1996 or 1997. There is no certainty that we would have become involved in the Wars in Iraq or Afghanistan, if in turn they had happened.

John Smith becomes Labour Leader

With Neil Kinnock having failed to Lead the Labour Party back to power in either 1987 or 1992, it was time for him to step down.

John Smith, the respected Scottish Labour MP was elected Labour Leader and settled in to taking Labour in a new direction.

What if different decisions had been made: Had another Labour MP been Elected Opposition Leader at this point, there is a very good chance that they would have led Labour into the 1997 General Election rather than Tony Blair. This could have presented the Electorate with a very different choice and may have been the end of the New Labour project before it even began.

UK exit from the ERM

John Major’s most regrettable moment was the day that then Chancellor Norman (Now Lord) Lamont had to take the UK out of the ERM.

What if different decisions had been made:  Our economy could have been destroyed by staying within the harmonisation system, owing to the ERM requirement for the currencies of Members States to be very tightly synchronised. Up and coming politicians such as Tony Blair and Gordon Brown might not have seen the obvious risks of adopting the Euro as a shared currency. John Major might have gone on to win the 1997 General Election, bearing in mind that it was events like this which allowed Major’s Conservative Party to be financially inept, when the truth was no such thing.

1994

Tony Blair becomes Labour Leader

Following the untimely death of John Smith, the Labour Party Leadership Contest that followed was a watershed moment for the Labour Party and was to become the point that the New Labour project as an electoral force was born.

What if different decisions had been made: Another Labour MP would have been their Leader. Gordon Brown may have taken the job. Labour may not have won the 1997 General Election. Labour May not have won three General Elections in a row. The Iraq War might never of happened or the UK might never have become involved. Labour’s 1997-2010 overspend and the 2010 onwards period of ‘Austerity’ might never have come into being.

1997

General Election

New Labour’s historic landslide victory decimated the Tory Party, destroyed Conservative confidence and committed the UK to the direction of a charismatic and equally ambitious Prime Minister who saw their career as being very much aligned towards a bigger ‘world’ stage.

What if different decisions had been made: John Major’s Conservatives may have won another Term. There may have been a hung parliament or coalition government. Devolution might never of happened. The Scottish Parliament might not exist. The Welsh Assembly might not exist. We might not have signed the Lisbon Treaty. We might never have entered the single market as it stands today. We might never have had a question over Free Movement and Immigration. We may never have been involved in Iraq of Afghanistan. We might never have had such a significant debt in 2010, that Austerity – even as an idea had been deemed necessary. We might already have been out of Europe.

William Hague becomes Tory Leader

20 Years after his famous Conservative Party Conference Speech as a 16 year old, William Hague is elected Leader of the Conservative Party.

Inheriting a Parliamentary group which felt itself destroyed by the Labour victory earlier that year, Hague effectively walked into a role where keeping the Conservative Party engine running was about all that he could reasonably do in the circumstances. His greatest unacknowledged success was likely to be preventing the Party from becoming the spent force that it could have been.

What if different decisions had been made: Conservative Party may never have returned to Government. Hague may have become Tory Leader later, and then even PM himself.

1997 onwards

Devolution

Probably one of the biggest fibs told by Blair, his Government and the Labour Party was the one about his idea for Devolution and the ‘devolved Assemblies’.

Always part of the ‘European Plan’ to break up National identities into smaller, controllable Regions that could never again seek to acquire or execute power in a national form, on his ascendency Blair immediately embraced Devolution to win favour with the heads of the EU. He actually sold it to the Public as being a process of bringing democracy closer to people.

The truth was that Devolution and Regionalisation was all part of a process of creating hollow forms of ‘localised’ Government with real power being taken away from the UK and deposited undemocratically in Brussels to be used in a very different and autocratic form.

The sprat to catch the mackerel was the things like big funding giveaways to local areas, all branded as being available only with European Funding. You’ve seen the signs telling you everywhere that it was European Money being spent on this project and that. But this was always British Taxpayers money, redistributed, rebranded and packaged as a way of promoting European generosity when it was quite another thing altogether. It was a bribe in its most basic form.

What if different decisions had been made: There might not have been a Scottish Parliament. The SNP might have never secured an Independence Vote. Nicola Sturgeon may never have been the Holyrood Lead. Ruth Davidson might already be an MP in the Westminster Parliament. The UK might not have been at significant risk of breakup as it is today.

1999

Establishment of Scottish Parliament

Following the Devolution process, the Scottish Parliament was first established in May 1999.

What if different decisions had been made: We may never have had the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum. David Cameron may never have weaponised the SNP by making unnecessary concessions the morning after. The Conservatives might never have won a majority in the 2015 General Election. The 2016 European Referendum may never have happened. Brexit as a word could have never been invented. None of us would now be worrying what Leave might look like. Theresa May might never have been Prime Minister. We might now have Ed Milliband as Prime Minister, working his way towards a 2020 General Election. Jeremy Corbyn might never have become Labour Leader.

2001

General Election

Tony Blair’s New Labour win an almost identical result to the 1997 General Election, leaving the Conservative Party well and truly stumped.

What if different decisions had been made: William Hague might have been Prime Minister. There could have been a completely different Leader of the Labour Party soon after. We might have left Afghanistan earlier. We might never have been involved in the Iraq War. We might now have had a Labour Government led by a politician who we will now never know.

Iain Duncan Smith becomes Tory Leader

William Hague steps down and hands over the Opposition Leadership keys to Iain Duncan Smith (IDS).

The only real commonality between the two is being the butt of press ridicule and the hard reality that under both periods of Leadership, the Conservative Party appears to be going nowhere.

What if different decisions had been made: It’s quite possible that another Tory MP would have become Conservative Party Leader. The Tories might have won the 2005 General Election. We might never have been involved in Iraq.

You are beginning to get the picture.

2003

Michael Howard becomes Tory Leader

IDS accepts that he cannot lead the Conservative Party as it is. Michael (Now Lord) Howard has previous Government experience, is a ‘seasoned’ politician and is Elected Party Leader.

Howard’s arrival heralds the first real indications that the Conservative Party is ready to embrace change.

What if different decisions had been made: The Conservative Party might have not returned to Government in 2010. David Cameron may not have been Elected Tory Leader in 2005 and become Prime Minister in 2010. The SNP might not have bee given a Referendum. Brexit may never have happened….

Are you starting to picture the links?

2005

General Election

Tony Blair wins New Labour Election Victory No.3. The Tories pick up a few seats and there is a sense of small change, but in practical terms, at this stage at least, it resembles none.

What if different decisions had been made: Michael Howard would have been Prime Minister. Gordon Brown might never have become Labour Leader and in 2007, the PM. David Cameron may never have become Tory Leader. The Lisbon Treaty may never have been signed. The Immigration issue might never have materialised. The Scottish Referendum might never have happened. Brexit might not have been invented. We might now have another Labour Government with a PM who would have been….?

David Cameron becomes Tory Leader

Following the Tories third successive defeat to New Labour, Michael Howard knows that he has to do what is best for the direction of the Conservative Party which means only one thing.

Howard remains leader whilst a Tory Leadership Campaign takes shape, leaving contenders ‘2001 new boy David Cameron’ and ‘Europhile Big Beast Ken Clarke’ to fight it out for a Membership Vote Win.

David Cameron wins the Leadership race and becomes Tory Leader.

What if different decisions had been made: Ken Clarke might have become Prime Minister in 2010. We might now be more involved with the EU than ever before and Brexit would for many still be a hopeless dream. Gordon Brown might have won a Labour Majority in 2010, or at worst, been the leader of a Labour/Lib Dem Coalition, with the Tories perhaps broken, reforming as a new party or doing something else somewhere in between. The Milliband Brothers might still have been on a Labour Front Bench. Jeremy Corbyn could still be out of sight on the back benches.

2007

Gordon Brown ‘Crowned’ PM

Awaiting his moment noisily in No.11, Gordon Brown became Prime Minister on Tony Blair’s Resignation in June 2007.

Without the same skills and attributes of his immediate predecessor, Brown was unable to wow the crowds. The biggest moment of his tenure probably came with the event of the 2007-2008 Financial Crisis when his Government bailed out the privately owned Banks using Public Money, thereby sending the National Debt stratospheric from the point where after 10 years of Labour profligate spending already, it should never ever have already been.

What if different decisions had been made: We might have had a different Labour Prime Minister from 2007 until the next General Election which could have come in 2009 or 2010. Labour could have won a majority in 2010 or been the lead player in a hung parliament. David Cameron might never have been PM. Nick Clegg could still be in frontline Politics. The Lib Dems could now have been the third biggest Party in Parliament.

2010

General Election

The result of the General Election is hung.

Backroom deals are the flavour of the day, and whilst Brown sits it out in No.10 hoping for enough support to patch together a ‘Rainbow Coalition’ which keeps the Tories out of power, Nick Clegg does a deal with David Cameron which creates the Coalition Government with Cameron as PM and Clegg as Deputy PM.

As part of ‘the deal’, Cameron agrees to a Referendum on an Alternative Vote system. The two also agree to pass the Fixed Term Parliaments Act, which technically secures a standard 5-year term for any Government, and removes the ability of a sitting PM to call a General Election without having to ‘work’ the Parliamentary system to do so.

A disproportionate number of Lib Dem MP’s secure Ministerial Office, causing significant upset within the Conservative Party.

Nick Clegg is forced to renege on his commitment to scrap Tuition Fees for Students.

Gordon Brown steps down as Labour Party Leader.

What if different decisions had been made: Gordon Brown could have remained PM and leader of a ‘Rainbow Coalition made up of Labour, the Lib Dems, the SNP etc. David Cameron might have resigned. The Scottish Independence Referendum might have been held and Independence won. There might not have been an EU Referendum in 2016. There might have been a different Conservative Leader of the opposition fighting the 2015 General Election. David Milliband could have been the next Labour Leader.

Ed Milliband becomes Labour Leader

Now consigned to the memory of just a few, Gordon Brown’s departure left a vacancy which led to a fight between two ambitious politicians, but one of a family kind too.

Both David Milliband, who had ministerial experience, and his younger brother Ed, squared up to each other in a campaign which to this day has a cloud over it because of the way that the Labour Party attributed votes to this Leadership race.

Despite lacking the level of credibility of his older brother, Ed won the Labour Leadership.

What if different decisions had been made: David Milliband could have become Labour Leader and might now have been Prime Minister too. Jeremy Corbyn might never have become Labour Leader. Theresa May might never have become Prime Minister. Boris could still have been London Mayor.

2011

The Alternative Vote Referendum (AV)

Purely at the insistence of new Deputy PM Nick Clegg, and as one of the key ‘prices’ of 5 years support in Coalition for the Tory-led Government and David Cameron as PM, a Referendum was held in early May to consider replacing the First Past The Post electoral system with AV instead.

Based on Proportional Representation, the system favours small Political Parties and moves the emphasis from voting for a named representative to direct Party support.

Proportional Representation is a much less democratic system, focusing the shift towards supporting policy in a snapshot moment, which is always thereafter subject to change, in stead of providing the opportunity to select the best person to represent a constituency and be responsible in adapting to the changes during their elected term, but always doing so in respect of the common good.

The vote was lost by an overwhelming majority against the change of 67.9%.

What if different decisions had been made: It is likely that First Past the Post would now be dead, and all political offices would be elected using forms of proportional representation. We might never again have a majority Government sitting in the Westminster Parliament. Anything that the public now vote for might never again even have the chance to matter, because policy would always be decided between the Political Groups who make deals after each election to patch together a coalition, because none of them could achieve an outright win. We might never have had a European Referendum. David Cameron might have been the last ever Conservative PM. Jeremy Corbyn might never again have been elected as an MP.

2014

European Elections

I’ve included the European Parliamentary Elections in 2014, not because the European Parliament itself is influential. It is not.

The Parliament is little more than a patsy, created only to give the wider EU autocracy the appearance of being a democratic institution. It is not.

It is included because of the UK Result, which saw the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) win an additional 11 Seats, making them the biggest UK presence with 24 Seats in the European Parliament.

The result sent shockwaves through Westminster. UKIP was suddenly a real electoral threat to the Establishment ‘status quo’.

What if different decisions had been made: It is likely to have been the key deciding factor in David Cameron’s promise to hold a Referendum on EU Membership as part of his 2015 Manifesto for the General Election Campaign. It is likely that he thought the result would be another 5 years of Coalition with the Lib Dems at best, or at worst, a Vote he would have lost and seen Ed Milliband in No.10.

Would Cameron have promised the EU Referendum if he had been certain of electoral victory in 2015? We may never honestly know.

Scottish Independence Referendum

The result of the Referendum on the Question of Scottish Independence on 14th September 2014 was a majority against of 55.3% to yes of 44.7%.

The outcome itself may not have had any significant impact upon anything other than what the SNP would do next.

It was David Cameron’s decision to come out on to the steps of No.10 the following morning and make a range of commitments to the SNP, which was probably a lot more influential upon what was now in store.

What if different decisions had been made: Scotland might now be an independent Country. But the SNP might well have committed the Scots to Remaining within the EU at that time if the different chronology had given the EU a different view. That is of course if the 2015 General Election result had subsequently been the same.

2015

General Election

David Cameron’s Conservatives win an unexpected small, but nonetheless working majority in the Commons.

The Coalition is over. Cameron is committed to holding the European Referendum.

What if different decisions had been made: Ed Milliband would have been Prime Minister. The European Referendum would never have been held. We might ask the question what is Brexit? Jeremy Corbyn would never have become Labour Leader. Labour Momentum would never have existed.

Jeremy Corbyn becomes Labour Leader

No. It was far from being a certainty. Yet Jeremy Corbyn cleaned up in the Labour Leadership Election following Ed Milliband’s post-General Election Resignation.

Corbyn was never taken seriously as a Candidate, and it is regrettably likely that at other times sensible Labour MP’s gave him their support to run, with the intent of causing disruption to the Campaigns of more credible participants. Those who did so were blind to the even the short-term realities of the outcome if Corbyn actually won.

Which he did.

What if different decisions had been made: Labour might have had a more credible, mainstream leader, who isn’t a Marxist at their core. Labour may well have won the 2017 General Election. The Brexit Negotiations might have now been in the hands of a Labour Leader. Theresa May might never have become Prime Minister. Boris might now be leader of the opposition.

2015-16

David Cameron’s EU ‘Renegotiation’

The Renegotiation of the relationship between the UK and EU that never was.

It is likely that following on from the many dubious wins against an unknowing pubic in which ambitious politicians had previously used manipulation, spin and complete bullshit to win before, Cameron had concluded that big theatrics and dramatics suggesting real effort resulting in something meaningful, would line him up for a Referendum Win.

The reality was that Cameron never achieved anything even remotely meaningful in his ‘renegotiations’, and the EU was already viewing the intrsigence of a Member State which had the audacity to question its future with the EU as being insubordinate and behaviour which must quickly be consigned to the bin.

So sure of success was Cameron and his closest allies such as then Chancellor George Osborne, that they never even began work on putting together the steps of a Contingency Plan, if their attempted stitch-up leading to a Remain Win in the EU Referendum was then denied.

What if different decisions had been made: In theory, Cameron could have really gone for the jugular when he squared up to ask the questions of the EU, from which real results could have given him a genuine Referendum Win.

In reality, the EU has made very clear that every nation which becomes a Member is restricted to the same rules and must therefore consider itself without any real means of having separate identity.

Once you are in, it doesn’t matter what bullshit you give to Voters (or sleeping politicians), you accept that EU Members States behave as one.

2016

European Referendum

The Leave or No Vote wins 51.9% to 48.1% (A difference of 1,269, 501 Votes with a 72.21% turnout of the Electorate).

Britain’s Exit – thereafter known as ‘Brexit’ is born.

What if different decisions had been made: David Cameron would probably have still been our PM. We may well have now been on the way to adopting the Euro. We might well have been up to our necks in surrendering what’s left of the armed services to the new ‘Euro Army’. There would probably have been an increase in European workers coming to the UK. The rate of Public Services crashing through lack of funding may well have increased substantially. The list of more and more powers being surrendered to Brussels would probably now have been much much longer. It is likely that the true designs of the EU to become the United States of Europe would now be in the open, either directly, but more likely through yet more manipulative PR management which is designed to make all of us think that everything is staying the same.

David Cameron Resigns

Probably one of the most notable ‘oh fuck’ moments of recent UK political history, would have come at around 25 minutes to 5 on the morning of 24th June 2016, to the then occupant of No.10.

We know that Cameron didn’t see the No Vote coming. We know he didn’t because the Establishment didn’t expect it. And there are a great many Leavers who despite voting NO, didn’t quite believe it was possible to win our Freedom through a democratic process too.

To be fair to David Cameron, he clearly never believed in Brexit. Although he had given the impression that he would lead the implementation of a No result, accepting that he could not deliver something that he didn’t himself want and that resigning was therefore the right thing, was almost certainly the most responsible thing for him to do in the circumstances. Unfortunately, it was a point missed by Remainers in the Cabinet who coveted the top job.

What if different decisions had been made: If Cameron had stayed, there may have been many similarities to the current Premiership of Theresa May, in that his heart would not have been in Brexit and instead of building a relationship between two separate entities, he would have likely focused all efforts on doing the absolute minimum that would be seen to qualify as ‘Leave’. 

Alternatively, he might well have embraced the instruction from the British People in the spirit that it was given, and done everything to get the best from a situation where nobody from either side could genuinely predict everything that could be achieved.

The big difference is likely to have been that Cameron is unlikely to have called the 2017 General Election, which would have in turn given him choices with a working majority, that Theresa May would by now never have.

Boris knifed

It was an open secret that Boris had returned to the Commons as an MP with the Leadership of the Tory Party in mind.

So when Cameron lit the fuse on the Leadership contest, few were under any illusion that Boris wouldn’t be one of the two final contenders when the Vote went out to Conservative Party Members.

That was until on the morning of Boris announcing his Candidacy, Michael Gove’s change of mind in supporting him as a Leadership Contender came fully into view.

Boris had nowhere to go. And whilst the true aim of Gove’s decision to pull the rug from under Boris’s Leadership chances may never be known, the intervention did nothing to help Gove’s own hopes of becoming Conservative Party Leader.

Before anyone had the chance to take a second breath, the contest was already down to just two.

What if different decisions had been made: Despite the many voices ranged against him, Boris Johnson was likely to have become PM, and was almost certain to have done so if the question had gone out to Conservative Party Members.

The talk of Boris being nothing but ambition rang true, not simply because Boris was and remains ambitious – he does. But because it is the same ambition that is rife amongst all the senior Members of the Conservative Party, who are desperate for their leadership hopes to come to fruition – no matter the real cost.

Boris may be to some no more than a lovable buffoon. But what he has which beyond the pure, unadulterated form of ambition which drives many of his Conservative colleagues, is the skill to read and often be a step ahead of the public mood, just in time to make decisions that can actually work out well for Voters too.

This ability is likely to have served him very well during negotiations with the EU, and in delivering a clean Brexit. Because Boris being loyal to Boris, he would have ensured that he was committed to delivering what the real public – that’s everyone beyond the bubble of Westminster – has demanded that the PM and Party of Government should actually achieve.

Boris’ moment may come again very soon. But the terrain is now much different and outcomes that could have easily been very different if different choices had been made, will now influence the outcomes of responding actions and outcomes to come, whether deliberate or otherwise.

Whether or not Boris would be good leading the UK in a crisis situation, like the wartime Leader Churchill who he wishes us to see his behaviour modelled upon is a different question altogether.

Like May being ‘Crowned’ in 2016 to ‘take care of Brexit’, we might soon step into a very different kind of Government Leadership which will not be about Leave or Remain, but responding simply to a very long list of unknowns.

Andrea Leadsom exits Tory Leadership contest

Leadsom seemed to appear from nowhere and as such, didn’t appear to have the baggage of the other final contestant in the Tory Leadership Campaigns – Theresa May.

But where May had made keeping her mouth shut during the European Referendum an art form, Leadsom’s inexperience with the Media regrettably led her into a mess over making comments relating to her understanding as a mother which was unavailable to Theresa May. From that moment, her time as a Candidate to become next Prime Minister was pretty much done.

What if different decisions had been made: Theresa May might not have been Prime Minister, as Leadsom may have been much more appealing to the Conservative Party Membership, once the Campaigning side of Theresa May which we only saw in the 2017 General Election Campaign had come into general view. The 2017 General Election might never have been called. The Conservatives might now have a working majority to push through a meaningful Brexit.

Theresa May ‘Crowned’ PM

With Andrea Leadsom stepping out of the Tory Leadership Contest, Theresa May become the de facto Conservative Leader Elect.

Cameron quickly went to the Queen and stepped aside.

May entered Downing Street giving everyone the impression that when it came to Brexit, she was now committed and very much on the UK side.

What if different decisions had been made: Pretty much what has been discussed under Boris and Andrea Leadsom above. But May wouldn’t have been PM and the chances are that one way or another, we would not be in such a terrible mess as we are today.

2017

Article 50 Triggered

At the end of March 2017, Theresa May triggered Article 50, the device or ‘clause’ for a Member nation to Leave the EU.

This action started a 2-year countdown to 11pm on Friday 29th March 2019, when the UK would formally leave EU Membership.

What if different decisions had been made: Triggering Article 50 – assuming that the UK leaving the EU would always be conducted in relation to EU processes – was not a question of if, but was certainly a question of when.

May could have waited and overseen full preparation before doing so which would ideally have included a real understanding of what Brexit must achieve, therefore allowing the negotiations between Triggering Article 50 and Leaving to be meaningful in between.

Alternatively, May could have got on with triggering Artcile 50 much sooner, working on Brexit from the point of the UK being independent and then developing a new relationship with the EU for whatever would then happen for the future, rather than doing everything possible to Remain, whilst doing the absolute minimum to sell her efforts as a commitment to Leave.

General Election

It was so clear that Theresa May was sure of Victory and of winning an increased majority that would ensure her plans for Brexit were delivered.

Despite the Party machine not being ready, there already being a small but nonetheless working majority in the Commons in place, nor the fact her ability as a ‘street-fighting campaign leader’ had ever been tested, May listened to the Polls, went for the General Election, and assumed that like everything else, public support was no more than a question of applying process, and that her glowing future would soon be in the bag.

Things quickly began to unwind. Corbyn proved himself good on the stump, making hollow promises which appealed to aspirations without any respect for practicality, and the Lib Dems, still nowhere after the 2015 rejection, were not even in the middle and nowhere to be seen.

May couldn’t match Corbyn on the Campaign trail and was soon exposed as not being ‘natural’ with people, being far too scripted, meanwhile exhibiting all the behaviour which has made the label ‘Maybot’ stick – and in doing so seem very fair.

What if different decisions had been made: May could have had a working majority now BEFORE attempting to do deals to allow for the Conservative die-hard Remain faction. The Parliamentary pathway to where we are now might have been much smoother over recent months, giving the PM more room to play with as she dealt with the EU. Olly Robbins would probably not have been the Civil Servant leading the Brexit negotiations.

£1 Billion that could have been spent elsewhere on Public Services might not have been firehosed at Northern Ireland at the price of securing 10 DUP Votes for the duration of the Parliamentary Term.

2018

‘The Chequers Plan’

In the Summer of 2018, May’s true credentials as a Remainer Prime Minister and her Plan to welch on Brexit finally came into view.

Within days, David Davis, then Brexit Secretary and then Boris Johnson, then Foreign Secretary had resigned.

Yet all other Cabinet Ministers remained still and quiet, heralding yet more concessions on the part of the MP’s who had the real ability to stop this whole charade, and rescue Brexit from the mess it is now; the sell-out of democracy that in May’s hands, it is still likely to be.

What if different decisions had been made: More of the Cabinet could and arguably should have resigned.

The cumulative numbers of resignation at the top level would have soon made May’s continued Premiership untenable and a new Conservative Leader would have by now been crowned.

That there has only ever been talk of further Cabinet Resignations until now is a worrying sign.

For the Conservative Party, it may mean a bleak future. Culturally, the Cabinet incumbents are far more focused on lining themselves up ‘securely’ for a leadership bid, rather than doing for the Country all that is right. 

The thing that they all need to remember is that no matter what they do or choose, only one of the current crop of Conservative MP’s could replace May as Prime Minister, but the ridiculousness of their own ambition is now making even that option look very tough indeed.

In Summary & Ending

As I suggested earlier, these points are all a view of what has happened, set against just a few of the possibilities of what could have been if sometimes very small decisions had been made.

The point I am making is that from small decisions, BIG consequences are formed. And those consequences are rarely apparent in immediate view.

Consequences can be anticipated and accurately so. But they cannot be controlled and it is certainly true that every action will have a reaction, even when the person or persons taking that action are no longer involved.

Theresa May and the Establishment, along with the EU are currently doing everything that they can to manufacture a very different kind of Brexit to the one which the People intended, either deliberately or through acts of unintended stupidity.

These are actions that are not only going to impact on the true outcome of Brexit, but on many other things in both the UK and Europe which right now are out of sight, out of mind.

Because of their actions in trying to manipulate Brexit, they will ultimately deliver unintended consequences and outcomes which would otherwise unlikely to have ever been seen.

 

Read this Blog on your Kindle