Bristling Brock speaks out...


  • A
  • Atom
  • Manhatten
  • News
  • Thames

Pin It


So, the proposed Withdrawal Agreement proposed by the Johnson government has been, yet again, pushed further down the ever extending timetable of the Brexit saga.

Those who would Remain in this tale of fevered dispute are, presumably, very pleased that the vote against the government favoured their position of never ending delay ultimately leading to the revocation of Article 50 and a resumption of full EU membership.  Those that would Leave are most likely chewing bricks and spitting frustration and disbelief that the prospect of an immediate solution to ‘leaving’ (albeit one that was by no means ideal) has yet again been sabotaged by parliamentary technicalities and a House of Commons with an extremely self-centred focus.

The very fact that there is such a fight going on over Brexit is testimony to the polar extremes to which British communities have gravitated.  Bitterness, frustration, anger and incredulity mingle with the perceived notions of which course of action is better for Britain - in or out.  The fact that the 2016 referendum result still stands in law has become irrelevant as parliament has displayed an egregious capacity for flexing legal interpretations and instituting laws of its own which inhibit the means to bring the Brexit tale to some sort of conclusion.  That law is being flouted so openly shouldn’t really surprise us, for we see it all around us every day with a broadening disrespect for adherence to common law in both our communities and in parliament.  One persons law has become ‘floutable’ by just about anyone who wishes to disregard it.  In short, the integrity and absolute pre-eminence of law and abidance to it has diminished progressively across the country.  So if Parliament twists and turns the laws of the land to suit vested interest arguments, again, there should be no surprise.  It has, after all, always gone on - we just haven’t been that bothered about it until Brexit came along.

And what of the Johnson proposed agreement ?  It was markedly better than the product that Theresa May came up with but it still fell short of fulfilling everyone’s expectations.  And therein lies the problem.  Such an agreement could never address every single concern from the corners of the nation, every doubt, every niggle, every angled and technical demand.  Even Aristotle would have failed to achieve that.  What it could have been was a method to bring Brexit to a conclusion in a way that gave the country latitude to adjust to life outside of the EU with the beginnings of trade deals being brokered around the world whilst enabling business, industry and communities time to realign themselves in keeping with the frameworks of the agreement.  It would have been a gate opener for business that could have defined their operating positions clearly and enabled decisions on adjustment, investment and productivity to be taken.  It would have been the means by which the aching tooth of the population could have been extracted, a finality to the endless squabbling, acrimony and nastiness that has crept into our very souls, an end to the uncertainty and an end to the media frenzy that has pervaded everyone’s life for the last three and a half years.  This might sound glib, but we should not underestimate the psychological advantage of removing the Brexit albatross from around Britain’s neck and clearing the pathway for moving on.  Moving on wholly on British terms was never going to happen and it is naive to imagine the EU will bend over backwards even more to accommodate the bizarre and expectation all demands of the Labour Party and others.  To leave and secure battle space for future negotiations (on trade and other bilateral areas of interest) was the very essence of the Johnson proposal.  It would have been the way to get the job done, clear enough to start meaningful trade talks and, most significantly, reenergise the country with a mission that everyone had an interest in making it succeed.  Again, in short, we have blown a key opportunity in trouncing Johnson’s proposal.  We should be collectively ashamed that it’s delay and frustration has been allowed to happen.

But, of course, let us not forget that parliament wants to thwart Brexit lock, stock and barrel.  The Labour Party want to kill it, the LibDems want to kill it, the SNP want to kill it, the Greens want to kill it and doubtless the DUP and most of Ireland wants to kill it.  Yet who is it with all these death wishes toward Brexit ? None other than our erstwhile politicians and parliamentarians, that corrupted and disconnected bunch of non-qualified representatives that the wholly antiquated and unrealistic first past the post voting system permits to enter the Commons.   That we have allowed such people to be in charge of this process is unforgivable.  If you were the CEO of a big company making decisive judgements on a course of action, would you seriously allow people like our MP’s anywhere near the boardroom ?  Of course you wouldn’t.  But Party loyalties, career opportunities and vested interest pervade the very stones of Parliament.  And look what a dogs dinner they are making of Brexit, not least in their total disregard of the referendum result.

Brexit will never reach a conclusion without brave and possibly painful choices being taken.  Regrettably, with our Parliament, there is little chance of wise, brave and selfless decisions being made - only those that suit the Party Politic.


No thoughts on “Where Now ?”