Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What we are seeing in the British politics at the moment could
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What we are seeing in the British politics at the moment could be “The New Normal”
So, here we are, losses for both main parties, laceratingly large for the Tories, some in surprising places, the Lib Dems and the Greens cock-a-hoop, the NOTA party making a fine showing and the inevitable calls for a change of leadership – with May more at risk, what with being heckled in Wales and facing an EGM in June. (Perhaps Trump could orchestrate proceedings during his forthcoming visit. He has experience in saying “You’re fired!” after all – with his British Mini-Me already copying his “Lock her up!” slogan – and it may be the only act which might give him some measure of popularity in Britain). Party spokesmen come out with their prepared responses. “We must do Brexit” they claim, without even pausing to wonder whether an increased vote for explicitly Remain parties and Independents might suggest wider, different concerns.
Comments
Facing an unparalleled drubbing, plan A is to rush through a customs union deal with Labour and cancel the elections. What is plan B?
It’s clear she’s never had any Plan B to her WA, even though it’s been rejected three times so far. Stubbornly presenting the same document again still isn’t going to get past MPs.
> Does Theresa May have a plan B for the European elections in a couple of weeks?
>
> Facing an unparalleled drubbing, plan A is to rush through a customs union deal with Labour and cancel the elections. What is plan B?
The Euro elections will not be cancelled even in the event of the WA being passed, because it also has to pass the European Parliament, and that won't meet again until July. May and the Tories are just going to have to suck it up.
A good header @Cyclefree.
> Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
I rarely comment, but, for the first time ever I voted Lib dem, not because I like their ideas or policy etc, it was a pure protest vote.
Both major parties seem to be saying "We get it", must finish brexit. The message I and many others were sending is "Remain".
Hopefully I will never vote Lib dem again, I could never vote Green, even though I spent most of my working life developing innovative recycling, and alternative energy schemes.
I agree that this will be the state of play for quite some time.
> Good piece,thanks.
> I rarely comment, but, for the first time ever I voted Lib dem, not because I like their ideas or policy etc, it was a pure protest vote.
> Both major parties seem to be saying "We get it", must finish brexit. The message I and many others were sending is "Remain".
> Hopefully I will never vote Lib dem again, I could never vote Green, even though I spent most of my working life developing innovative recycling, and alternative energy schemes.
Sounds to me like you need to vote LibDem at least once again?
> > @Sandpit said:
> > Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
>
> I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
When you take away putting the interests of the economy and of the Union first and, well, being conservative, what do they have left?
> Does Theresa May have a plan B for the European elections in a couple of weeks?
>
> Facing an unparalleled drubbing, plan A is to rush through a customs union deal with Labour and cancel the elections. What is plan B?
A week or two back, plan B appeared to be to force MPs to express a preference for some option (probably the very same CU proposal) through a preference-voted options exercise, and then hope that having voted for it in that there would be sufficient pressure on a majority to see it through into the Bill.
At one point the hints were that this options exercise would happen quickly. Either the government has gone cool on the idea or they really do hope the discussions with Corbyn are about to land a result.
I wonder if GE17 was the last great shout for the duopoly? Both parties are fracturing both ideologically (Methodism vs Marxism and dogmatism vs pragmatism) and geographically (What cuts it in the educated metropolitan groups doesn't in the poorer provincial ones - and vice versa, and all those young professionals driven out of London to South East England by property prices won't be voting Tory anytime soon) - so perhaps this is indeed 'the new normal' - Brexit was there 'at the scene of the crime' - but this has been coming down the tracks a while.
> Great article Cyclefree - thank you.
>
> I wonder if GE17 was the last great shout for the duopoly? Both parties are fracturing both ideologically (Methodism vs Marxism and dogmatism vs pragmatism) and geographically (What cuts it in the educated metropolitan groups doesn't in the poorer provincial ones - and vice versa, and all those young professionals driven out of London to South East England by property prices won't be voting Tory anytime soon) - so perhaps this is indeed 'the new normal' - Brexit was there 'at the scene of the crime' - but this has been coming down the tracks a while.
The duopoly is an artifact of FPTP, so unless you have a route to change that, the best you can hope for is probably flipping one or both of the parties so you end up with a different duopoly.
https://www.seattletimes.com/business/boeing-aerospace/long-before-first-737-max-crash-boeing-knew-a-key-sensor-warning-light-wasnt-working-but-told-no-one/
It is a radical pursuit of an abstract - sovereignty - without any apparent coherent thought about the consequences, let alone planning for the nation’s future.
And yes, an excellent header. I could tell it was a Cyclefree article from the first paragraph.
If we’re talking about the board, then who knows ? They appear to have existed in a state of blissful ignorance when it comes to safety matters.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/05/06/safety-was-just-given-inside-boeings-boardroom-amid-max-crisis/
Some corporate boards, such as JetBlue and Dow Chemical, mandate safety oversight in their bylaws, seeing it as a part of their duty to manage risks. Boeing’s corporate governance principles do not mention the word “safety,” and its board does not include any experts in airplane safety....
> > @CarlottaVance said:
> > Great article Cyclefree - thank you.
> >
> > I wonder if GE17 was the last great shout for the duopoly? Both parties are fracturing both ideologically (Methodism vs Marxism and dogmatism vs pragmatism) and geographically (What cuts it in the educated metropolitan groups doesn't in the poorer provincial ones - and vice versa, and all those young professionals driven out of London to South East England by property prices won't be voting Tory anytime soon) - so perhaps this is indeed 'the new normal' - Brexit was there 'at the scene of the crime' - but this has been coming down the tracks a while.
>
> The duopoly is an artifact of FPTP, so unless you have a route to change that, the best you can hope for is probably flipping one or both of the parties so you end up with a different duopoly.
FPTnP doesn’t necessitate a two-party system (although arguably it only really ‘works’, even on its own terms, if there is one) - the party system we have was driven by class politics with the class-driver of voting behaviour being both predominant across the country and geographically variable. Where this no longer applies - the notable exceptions being the regionally-driven voting behaviour that overrode class to deliver most of the South West to the LibDems 1997-05 and most of Scotland to the SNP since 2015 - other parties can gain a foothold.
The possibly emerging culturally driven divide (although one could argue age is in fact the stronger driver) also has two camps. Whether this will settle into the new basis of an American style two-party system remains to be seen. To do so it would need to replace politics based on class (or economic self-interest) almost entirely, which right now seems unlikely. Whereas you could almost see most of the remainers in some sort of centralist social Democratic Party, the challenge is for the leavers who clearly divide into right-wing/libertarian and left-wing socialist camps, which aren’t going to co-exist in any future broad tent party.
> > @edmundintokyo said:
>
> > > @CarlottaVance said:
>
> > > Great article Cyclefree - thank you.
>
> > >
>
> > > I wonder if GE17 was the last great shout for the duopoly? Both parties are fracturing both ideologically (Methodism vs Marxism and dogmatism vs pragmatism) and geographically (What cuts it in the educated metropolitan groups doesn't in the poorer provincial ones - and vice versa, and all those young professionals driven out of London to South East England by property prices won't be voting Tory anytime soon) - so perhaps this is indeed 'the new normal' - Brexit was there 'at the scene of the crime' - but this has been coming down the tracks a while.
>
> >
>
> > The duopoly is an artifact of FPTP, so unless you have a route to change that, the best you can hope for is probably flipping one or both of the parties so you end up with a different duopoly.
>
>
>
> FPTnP doesn’t necessitate a two-party system (although arguably it only really ‘works’, even on its own terms, if there is one) - the party system we have was driven by class politics with the class-driver of voting behaviour being both predominant across the country and geographically variable. Where this no longer applies - the notable exceptions being the regionally-driven voting behaviour that overrode class to deliver most of the South West to the LibDems 1997-05 most of Scotland to the SNP since 2015.
>
>
>
> The possibly emerging culturally driven divide (although one could argue age is in fact the stronger driver) also has two camps. Whether this will settle into the new basis of an American style two-party system remains to be seen. To do so it would need to replace politics based on class (or economic self-interest) almost entirely, which right now seems unlikely.
>
> It will soon settle back to being contest between mutt and Jeff, too many dumplings roaming the streets for anything sensible to happen in the UK.
The challenge is to break the system even temporarily in order to change it. CUK looks heading for failure until or unless one of the main parties breaks (still quite possible). Or there is HY’s great white hope.
> > @hamiltonace said:
>
> > > @Sandpit said:
>
> > > Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
>
> >
>
> > I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
>
>
>
>
>
> When you take away putting the interests of the economy and of the Union first and, well, being conservative, what do they have left?
>
> Brexit is not a conservative project.
> It is a radical pursuit of an abstract - sovereignty - without any apparent coherent thought about the consequences, let alone planning for the nation’s future.
>
> And yes, an excellent header. I could tell it was a Cyclefree article from the first paragraph.
Yes, that was my point. Brexit has separated Conservatives from their senses, in so many ways. The trap is that something that appears superficially conservative, ‘merely’ seeking to restore an earlier era, is in its contemporary context actually a highly radical and disruptive break with the established order, culture and institutional framework.
The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
It's one reason I'm so concerned about the censorious nature of modern politics.
> An excellent header Cyclefree. I agree with every word you have said
+1
The ship has sailed.
Mr. Matt, we'll be able to determine our own domestic laws rather than have them imposed by the EU, and thus able to hold the political decision-makers to account directly, rather than have MPs point to the EU as a scapegoat (which is another reason that scepticism flourished).
And which ship is that ?
We’ll find out what it’s like to negotiate from a real position of weakness.
> Mr. Glenn, ha.
>
> The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
>
> It's one reason I'm so concerned about the censorious nature of modern politics.
>
> Reclaiming allegedly lost power to be net less powerful hardly seems like a good or sensible trade.
>
> Mr. Glenn, ha.
>
> The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
>
>
> As we’ll discover after we have left the EU.
>
>
>
> It should be pretty clear by now that should we remain in the EU we will have no power whatsoever.
>
> The ship has sailed.
I think this is self pitying nonsense... If we Remain it is pretty obvious that a lot of things have to change, but at least we are not committing economic hara-kiri.
We might slink about like a slapped cat, or we could re-energize ourselves and start to inject some enthusiasm into the process... and that is only our call to make. Listening to the little Englanders who want the UK to break up has been depressing and maddening. This kind of stupidity deserves nothing but a Bronx cheer.
"Which domestic laws have been imposed against our will by the EU?"
The EU produce Directives and Regulations. Although Directives need to be made into British regulations, European Regulations are already law in the UK.
> > @brokenwheel said:
> > Mr. Glenn, ha.
> >
> > The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
> >
> > It's one reason I'm so concerned about the censorious nature of modern politics.
> >
> > Reclaiming allegedly lost power to be net less powerful hardly seems like a good or sensible trade.
> >
> > Mr. Glenn, ha.
> >
> > The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
> >
> >
> > As we’ll discover after we have left the EU.
> >
> >
> >
> > It should be pretty clear by now that should we remain in the EU we will have no power whatsoever.
> >
> > The ship has sailed.
>
> I think this is self pitying nonsense... If we Remain it is pretty obvious that a lot of things have to change, but at least we are not committing economic hara-kiri.
>
> We might slink about like a slapped cat, or we could re-energize ourselves and start to inject some enthusiasm into the process... and that is only our call to make. Listening to the little Englanders who want the UK to break up has been depressing and maddening. This kind of stupidity deserves nothing but a Bronx cheer.
The dream scenario is that the Conservatives are consigned to the WPB along with Brexit, and somehow we get political reform and some kind of sensible social democratic government willing to re-engage more positively with our continental partners.
It should be pretty clear by now that should we remain in the EU we will have no power whatsoever.The ship has sailed.
You what? We would retain every power and right conferred on each and every member by the EU constitution, and would continue to enjoy the further soft power we gain from our relative economic and military pre eminence. What ship has sailed, and where to? Good metaphors should clarify rather than obfuscate.
But the key issue is that the EU integrates ever more, and we need to decide whether we wish to be an independent, self-governing nation, or a state within a wider EU. And for those claiming that's a fantasy, much the same was said only a few years ago about the EU army.
Mr. Glenn, possibly, from some, but we would be able to hold those who determine our domestic laws to account, which we cannot now.
Mr. B, what's the alternative? The EU cannot be reformed. It seeks only to accrue power to the centre, away from the accountable democracies of nation-states. If you're in favour of a United States of Europe, that's fine. If you're not, what realistic alternative is there to leaving?
If our political class had not created a political centre-ground that was solidly pro-EU yet had little common ground with the electorate, we'd be in a better position, having certainly held a referendum on Lisbon (if not earlier). Instead they make anti-EU noises in opposition and act quite differently in office, gleefully throwing away vetoes and reneging upon manifesto pledges to do it.
Of course I framed it with a civil war analogy because superficial historical allegories are fun.
As soon as I reached 'British Mini-Me' I was certain who the author was.
But politicians come and go. Constitutional arrangements, treaties, and laws last altogether longer.
Dr. Foxy, just a general point on the 'we opposed' line: almost the entire UK political class is pro-EU. British MEPs being for something doesn't mean it's either in the national interest or supported by most people.
They voted for Articles 11 and 13. I find it hard to believe the electorate was yearning for the link tax and a crackdown on creativity.
Senior party sources said they believe two-thirds of Labour MPs, including several shadow cabinet ministers and many more frontbenchers, would refuse to back a deal without a people’s vote attached.”
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/05/labour-mps-say-they-wont-back-a-brexit-deal-without-a-peoples-vote
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1125301080903036928?s=19
Note the swords on the wall behind, no Elf and safety here!
> Mr. Glenn, ha.
>
> The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
>
> It's one reason I'm so concerned about the censorious nature of modern politics.
>
> Reclaiming allegedly lost power to be net less powerful hardly seems like a good or sensible trade.
>
> Mr. Glenn, ha.
>
> The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
>
>
> As we’ll discover after we have left the EU.
>
>
>
> It should be pretty clear by now that should we remain in the EU we will have no power whatsoever.
>
> The ship has sailed.
Wrong - we'd be welcomedback with open arms and influence comes with economic strength - which we have.
Her best hope would appear to be if the labour leadership reject it could she put the plan the commons and see enough lab mps back it because she really had given them something.
It seems doubtful. If 2/3 wont back it even if the leadership does then less than 1/3 will if the leadership opposes it. Add in you need more than 30 to back it, possibly double or triple that or more as some who backed the WA have already recanted and many more Tories would vote against it, and once more it falls .
In the case of Regulations, no further British input is allowed. In the case of Directives, we can adapt them a little to our own form of legislation, but there are limits and these are 'policed' by the EU.
While we're on this subject, one reason why some on the left have become enamoured of the EU is that Health and Safety laws have become stricter. Limits are set for exposure to dangerous substances at work to make them uniform across the EU. However laws don't magically work without enforcement. British Industry often complains that the UK (and Germany, for instance) do enforce these laws properly whereas the Mediterranean countries never bother. So they can sign them off happily because no one will ever check.
We could make these same stricter laws ourselves, but the left don't trust a UK Tory government. They eat babies, you know.
There are many laws from Europe that we must import and where our input is one vote in twenty eight. Hence the reason to form 'gangs' and do quid pro quo deals. You may think this a good thing, but don't try and deny it happens.
> > @brokenwheel said:
> > Mr. Glenn, ha.
> >
> > The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
> >
> > It's one reason I'm so concerned about the censorious nature of modern politics.
> >
> > Reclaiming allegedly lost power to be net less powerful hardly seems like a good or sensible trade.
> >
> > Mr. Glenn, ha.
> >
> > The lesson is that giving away power is a lot easier than reclaiming it.
> >
> >
> > As we’ll discover after we have left the EU.
> >
> >
> >
> > It should be pretty clear by now that should we remain in the EU we will have no power whatsoever.
> >
> > The ship has sailed.
>
> Wrong - we'd be welcomedback with open arms and influence comes with economic strength - which we have.
We would however be better regarded and more influential if we didn’t send another bunch of useless lunatics as our MEPs.
Italy did fine for over fifty years that way. The last twenty years, however, have told a sorrier tale.
https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1125154470684442624?s=21
Since when did mice try to trap cats with mousetraps? And what real harm would come to the cat anyway?
> Mr. Walker, I don't believe the UK would've gone down the nonsensical VAT route the EU did with the #VATmess. Also, I raised accountability. The UK political class is, idiotically, in favour of Articles 11 and 13, but outside the EU it would at least be possible to support a party that wants to get rid of those. Inside the EU, it's simply not possible.
>
> But the key issue is that the EU integrates ever more, and we need to decide whether we wish to be an independent, self-governing nation, or a state within a wider EU. And for those claiming that's a fantasy, much the same was said only a few years ago about the EU army.
>
> Mr. Glenn, possibly, from some, but we would be able to hold those who determine our domestic laws to account, which we cannot now.
>
> Mr. B, what's the alternative? The EU cannot be reformed. It seeks only to accrue power to the centre, away from the accountable democracies of nation-states. If you're in favour of a United States of Europe, that's fine. If you're not, what realistic alternative is there to leaving?
>
> If our political class had not created a political centre-ground that was solidly pro-EU yet had little common ground with the electorate, we'd be in a better position, having certainly held a referendum on Lisbon (if not earlier). Instead they make anti-EU noises in opposition and act quite differently in office, gleefully throwing away vetoes and reneging upon manifesto pledges to do it.
The "Vatmess" you refer to is the perfect example of a rule that the UK will have to take outside of the EU with no input or discussion.
Inside the EU, the UK is at the table where the regulations are being thrashed out, it has a vote that can stop most things it doesn't want, and it can lobby afterwards for change.
I understand the UK was one of those pushing for the "Vatmess". It may be a mess but it was a UK endorsed one. Which is the important sovereignty point.
> Mr. B, indeed, if that customs union and backstop nonsense goes ahead.
>
> Mr. Matt, we'll be able to determine our own domestic laws rather than have them imposed by the EU, and thus able to hold the political decision-makers to account directly, rather than have MPs point to the EU as a scapegoat (which is another reason that scepticism flourished).
>
> Which domestic laws have been imposed against our will by the EU?
One example: The right of 500,000,000 million people to live in the UK if they want with only very restricted powers to prevent it?
> > @Gardenwalker said:
> > Mr. B, indeed, if that customs union and backstop nonsense goes ahead.
> >
> > Mr. Matt, we'll be able to determine our own domestic laws rather than have them imposed by the EU, and thus able to hold the political decision-makers to account directly, rather than have MPs point to the EU as a scapegoat (which is another reason that scepticism flourished).
> >
> > Which domestic laws have been imposed against our will by the EU?
>
> One example: The right of 500,000,000 million people to live in the UK if they want with only very restricted powers to prevent it?
The Single Market was a British initiative, under Mrs Thatcher in the late eighties. You may not like FOM, but it was not imposed against our will.
https://twitter.com/jonlansman/status/1125075404644130816?s=21
Also, migration rates then were far lower than when Blair decided to 'rub the right's face in diversity'. And before further expansion (yeah, UK politicians were in favour of that too. But the divide between the political class and the electorate is a hallmark of the EU division).
> Never mind the article, I have questions about the cartoon:
>
>
>
> https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1125154470684442624
>
>
>
>
>
> Since when did mice try to trap cats with mousetraps? And what real harm would come to the cat anyway?
>
> And isn't Jerry the hero of those cartoons?
From memory of such films the result of such an enterprise would be that the trap sprung back and engulfed the cat.
And another thoughtful, and thought-provoking, piece from Ms Cyclefree.
> Never mind the article, I have questions about the cartoon:
>
> https://twitter.com/telegraph/status/1125154470684442624?s=21
>
> Since when did mice try to trap cats with mousetraps? And what real harm would come to the cat anyway?
I'm not prepared to pay to read that article but you get the comments for free. They are not happy reading for Boris whose previously popular snake oil is comprehensively rejected in favour of the new stronger Farage brand.
And yeah, that cartoon is just a bit weird.
> I’m afraid this has been a clear problem for years now. Britain is now in the midst of an experiment to see how long it can function effectively without a useful government.
>
> Italy did fine for over fifty years that way. The last twenty years, however, have told a sorrier tale.
I wonder what happened 20 years ago....
How else are we to determine this mysterious "Will of the People"?
> Mr. 43, that might still work out for Boris, though, as Farage won't be standing in the Conservative leadership contest.
>
> And yeah, that cartoon is just a bit weird.
But "I can't believe it's not UKIP" Conservatives will struggle against the real Farage.
Can you imagine trying to get this project funded and passed by HoC since the catastrophe of Cameron's stupid eu vote?
https://twitter.com/Eurostar/status/1125282811072712704
Or So I'd have expected but he still seems to charm many of the true believers.
https://twitter.com/foxinsoxuk/status/1125298679013879808?s=19
He makes it sound as everyone is dying of hunger in Birmingham
There is also a "moral emergency of Tory Britain" that he really wants to fight.
https://i1.wp.com/skwawkbox.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/byrne-email-1.png?w=940&ssl=1
EU immigration and non-EU immigration are two separate things.
If EU immigration was higher non-EU immigration would not be lower.
> > @hamiltonace said:
> > > @Sandpit said:
> > > Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
> >
> > I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
>
>
> When you take away putting the interests of the economy and of the Union first and, well, being conservative, what do they have left?
You make a good point. I fear even the possibility of rejoining will be a pipedream. The EU and the world have seen us for what we are and it's not been a pretty sight. Anyone wanting to deal with us in future would be advised to bring an exeedingly long spoon.
> > @Gardenwalker said:
> > Mr. B, indeed, if that customs union and backstop nonsense goes ahead.
> >
> > Mr. Matt, we'll be able to determine our own domestic laws rather than have them imposed by the EU, and thus able to hold the political decision-makers to account directly, rather than have MPs point to the EU as a scapegoat (which is another reason that scepticism flourished).
> >
> > Which domestic laws have been imposed against our will by the EU?
>
> One example: The right of 500,000,000 million people to live in the UK if they want with only very restricted powers to prevent it?
Well in theory every one of the 330 million Americans can visit the UK at the same time, but it doesn't happen does it?
In European discussions, the 'line to take' is dictated by civil servants. They seem to work by arranging deals. It's what they do. I'm quite sure their ministers aren't up to date with every nuance. So, Sir Humphry is the 'we'. Democracy in action.
Politics is now a twatter fueled rush to the extremes.
If there is one thing which would improve our politicians it would be a ban on twatter use.
https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/staggers/2015/12/ns-liveblog-retro-edition-1979
> We might slink about like a slapped cat, or we could re-energize ourselves and start to inject some enthusiasm into the process... and that is only our call to make. Listening to the little Englanders who want the UK to break up has been depressing and maddening. This kind of stupidity deserves nothing but a Bronx cheer.
>
> People who don't want the UK to break up need to come up with a coherent plan for constitutional reform pretty quickly.
A Federal UK has been Lib Dem policy for over 100 years, also including HoL Reform and electoral Reform... https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/libdems/pages/4138/attachments/original/1392840156/117_-_Power_to_the_People.pdf?1392840156
> > @hamiltonace said:
>
> > > @Sandpit said:
>
> > > Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
>
> >
>
> > I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
>
>
>
>
>
> When you take away putting the interests of the economy and of the Union first and, well, being conservative, what do they have left?
>
> Brexit is not a conservative project.
> It is a radical pursuit of an abstract - sovereignty - without any apparent coherent thought about the consequences, let alone planning for the nation’s future.
>
> And yes, an excellent header. I could tell it was a Cyclefree article from the first paragraph.
There's not a lot a lot about the EU that's small or large C Conservative.
Mr. Cicero, is that for an English Parliament or do they intend to carve England into pieces?
> ' Like all revolutions, the initial demand for a trading relationship shorn of the political stuff (this from a country which built an Empire on the back of and for trade) ends up being discarded for a pure untainted Year Zero approach. '
>
> Politics is now a twatter fueled rush to the extremes.
>
> If there is one thing which would improve our politicians it would be a ban on twatter use.
+1
> > @Nigelb said:
> > > @hamiltonace said:
> >
> > > > @Sandpit said:
> >
> > > > Third? Good piece as always Ms Cyclefree.
> >
> > >
> >
> > > I also think iit is a great piece. One point I would add is that the union is being trashed for so called democracy. The issues of Scotland and Northern Ireland in particular are being not just ignored but derided.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > When you take away putting the interests of the economy and of the Union first and, well, being conservative, what do they have left?
> >
> > Brexit is not a conservative project.
> > It is a radical pursuit of an abstract - sovereignty - without any apparent coherent thought about the consequences, let alone planning for the nation’s future.
> >
> > And yes, an excellent header. I could tell it was a Cyclefree article from the first paragraph.
>
> There's not a lot a lot about the EU that's small or large C Conservative.
The EU is very much an alliance between big government, big business and big culture.
There are elements of Conservative support which approve of that.