Obsession or treason - both very emotive words these days. But in Westminster both might well have some applicability when we start to look at the conduct and behaviours of a hard line clique of Conservative MP's on the one hand and the unashamed and stoked up ambition of the so called Leader of the Opposition.
Let's start with the Tory Remain Obsessives - the Hammond's, Clark's and Stewart's to identify just a handful. Bristling Brock has read (always dangerous these days) that there is growing evidence of the former Chancellor having connived with the EU to encourage them not to give any ground in discussions with Boris Johnson on the basis that the below the radar Tory rebels who don't want to leave the EU will kill it off in parliament anyway. Now BB is the first to concede that newspaper reports can occasionally be a little biased so a pinch of salt may be needed here. However, if even parts of this disclosure are true, we have a display of pretty extreme obsessiveness and, if we look further at the process of deliberately undermining government policy with a foreign power (aka, the EU), one assumes that this might be considered treason. In the old days, treason was rewarded with either a noose or a half dozen bullets but we might nowadays consider either of those responses a little too much for our politically correct and bend-over-backwards and righteous culture. If that is considered too much then the very least we can consider is expulsion from Parliament, Party and British citizenship (these culprits, whoever they are, would no doubt find a welcome in the hills in places everywhere around the EU). And, let's face it - we'd all be better off without characters prepared to subvert our country with a foreing state lurking around.
Now for Mr Corbyn. This fellow really has gone crackers. He also can be included in the obsessive category and his recent actions in openly trying to subvert the legitimate government of the state by encouraging MP's to vote against the government so that he can assume the premiership (albeit in a stated 'caretaker' position - yeah !) must rank pretty close to being treasonous if not strictly so.
What does this tell us about our parliament ? It tells us that our representatives are not that smart, very conscious of their privileged position and perks, not managed well by their respective party aparachiks and are as venal and self-obsessed as they come. BB will grant there are a minority of exceptions, but precious few. Is it not time that we have a complete overhaul of parliamentary dynamics, methods of representation and Party influence within the machinery of governance and the relationship that civil servants have with parliament ? This is not to suggest that our interpretive constitution should be significantly changed but it should be implemented by a far more representative cadre of parliamentarians and public servants. The current methods and tactics are just not fit-for-purpose.
In the interim, we should support Boris Johnson to get Brexit delivered. Once that's accomplished the opportunity to get this country moving on co-operative and collaborative lines is there to be taken. If we take the positive view and get behind Britain's capacity to evolve and develop a new way of life that can be so progressive should we wish.
I have a smidgen of sympathy for Carrie Symonds, that rather woebegone looking lass who now lives with the Prime Minister. True, Boris is still a married man, and Ms Symonds is the 'other woman' but looking around at the way the country now looks upon marriage and partnerships, the relationship between them is not unusual. Bristling Brock is of the view that Boris needs to get on with a tough job and if Ms Symonds can make that task a little more tolerable, then let them get on with their lives - hasn't nastiness towards people in the news gone far enough in this country ? We can surely reserve that for those who truly deserve it.