Mr Blair wants to thwart the wishes of the UK voters

Yesterday Mr Blair told us all we should have another referendum or Parliament should ignore the results of the vote on leaving the EU. He took my breath away, both by the hypocrisy of his position and by the vagueness of his proposals.

I recall Mr Blair won 3 elections in a row and formed a majority government each time. In each of those elections the south east of England voted by a substantial majority for a Conservative government. I and my fellow MPs representing that Conservative majority of the south east did not

1. Turn up at Parliament and say Mr Blair had no right to govern our voters
2.Take a case to court to say that as the south east of England is a larger part of the UK than Scotland and Northern Ireland combined in terms of voting population the UK government had no right to tell us what to do
3. Demand a re run of the election to try and get a better nationwide result
4 Say that because Labour lied, telling us there would be no more boom and bust and assuring us there would be very few EU migrants, the election was nul and void
5.Demand debates and votes on specific topics from the government in court actions when we were quite capable of tabling such debates and votes ourselves in opposition time

In a mature democracy like the UK we accept the verdict of the majority. A loyal Opposition in Parliament will oppose, challenge and try to influence a government, but accepts the government’s right to govern, and accepts that the main features of its Manifesto have every right to pass through Parliament.
Why does Mr Blair now think all these conventions and rules have been suspended, because he this time was on the losing side?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

132 Comments

  1. Ugly Whispers
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:39 am | Permalink

    When I asked one of Mr Blair’s university associates when he was just a student singer of a group, whether he like a number surrounding him was involved in our then revolutionary activities, he scoffed and replied “No, he doesn’t know anything about politics”
    So no change.

  2. Lifelogic
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:43 am | Permalink

    Indeed I expect very little from this “war on a blatant lie” man, but even so, I was shocked by Blair’s hypocrisy and vagueness. He did indeed win three elections. This was all largely thanks to John Major burying the Conservatives reputation of economic competence with his ERM fiasco, his 17%+ mortgage rates, his failure even to apologise for it, his “if it is not hurting it is not working” remark, his governments threats of “if we come out of the ERM interest rates will have to go up further”, his general pro EU lefty lunacy, his ever higher taxes and ever bigger government and his greencrap lunacy. This and the absurd foolishness of the Tory MPs in keeping John Major on after he “resigned”.

    Major like Heath and Cameron was yet another broken compass Tory leader clearly in the wrong party.

    Unlike Cameron he did at least have the excuse of vacuity I suppose. Is May going to be the same with he workers/customers or boards and gender pay drivel?

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:53 am | Permalink

      T May should start showing that she is actually a real Tory by saying she will pass a law to ensure that UBER and such companies are not caught by the absurd ruling that the drivers (whom they provide with communication, sales, payment and navigation aids) are “employees”. No one forces them to sign up to uber other companies are available.

      The economic damage that such absurd rulings can do is huge. Once again government just getting in the way. If Hammond wants productivity improvement get the government out of the damn way and get some sensible courts.

      What next will taxi driver be employees of Toyota because they drive a Prius. Will airbnb be deemed to be an hotelier with employees all over the place who own properties.

      Where on earth do they find the judges for such tribunals?

      • Bob
        Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:57 am | Permalink

        @lifelogic

        “will taxi drivers be employees of Toyota because they drive a Prius?”

        eBay & Amazon will need to watch out.

    • Hope
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:44 pm | Permalink

      Do not forget Blaire would have given away our currency for the Euro and we would all be bankrupt for his stupidity.

      Just imagine an EU army under EU president Blaire! The world would be totally unsafe.

    • Blair for PM
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

      Yes Blair won three elections. Mrs May nor Boris nor Mr Backstabber Extraordinaire has won an General Election, not one.
      Whatever Mr Blair may or may not have done properly or improperly, he was democratically elected and could have been thrown out of power had the average British voter got more than a shared brain cell between them. Lucky he was not worse given their stupidity. They deserved worse. Still do. It’ll serve them right if he comes back to power.

  3. Excalibur
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:43 am | Permalink

    A comprehensive summation, JR, and a notable put down of Anthony Blair’s arrogance,

    • Mitchel
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

      The man is not just arrogant but deeply sinister in terms of the interests and world view he represents and the fact that much of the UK Establishment is in league with him.

      Time for a total clearout.

  4. Ugly Whispers
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    It was said just to be an ugly rumour Mr Blair’s band were “all revolutionaries” hence the band’s name “Ugly Rumours”. One may ignore any other reasons given for its name.

  5. Prigger
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:55 am | Permalink

    Off Topic
    It’s strange how interviewed “ordinary Americans” who are in favour of Hillary Clinton still support her even if it is revealed, they say,subsequently, she is (trued snd found guilty re the emails ed)
    Mind you, they were being interviewed by a Brit who is a foreigner to them and they may have wished however seemingly oddly to be supportive of their electoral system.

  6. In His Head
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    Blair says in his article he believes the genuine anger about living and working conditions in the UK will “metastasize” ( a word which will leave most of the Shadow Cabinet being advised to consult a dictionary. Unfortunately most of them are likely to look up the word “dictionary” in it. ). He says these social ailments are “high all over Europe.”His solution is to offer a solution. What does he mean by solution? I guess he means Solution means Solution. We should all have a debate about Solution and mobilise and organise against it.

  7. Blaiwrite
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:34 am | Permalink

    The SNP are quietly hoping we stay out of the EU. It benefits Scotland greatly. It also allows the SNP an “external “enemy” which is for them a uniter and a vote puller. The very worst fate for Scotland would be swallowed up in a massive neo-colonialist power like the EU with no definitive “race” termed Tories and Red Tories.

    Blair is only playing at politics and will write such pieces while he is a name of note and periodicals ask his services. If he were to write in effect: “Everything is as it should be”
    then it would not sell. Though Corbyn says everything is wrong and few buy that.

  8. Anonymous
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:34 am | Permalink

    “A loyal Opposition in Parliament will oppose, challenge and try to influence a government, but accepts the government’s right to govern…”

    That’s the point. Federalists don’t accept the nation state’s right to govern.

  9. Brexit Facts4EU.org
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:37 am | Permalink

    Nail. Head. Hit it.

    Thank you for permission to reprint this on our site – it says what we wanted to say more eloquently than the piece we were just about to publish. It neatly follows our piece on Chuka Umunna.

    The Facts4EU.org Team at http://facts4eu.org/news.shtml

    Reply Thanks. Happy for you to use it

    • Jerry
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:17 am | Permalink

      If I might make an observation, and hopefully helpful suggestion, via our hosts site?

      @Facts4EU.org Team; Your URL reads more like a pro EU site than one promoting Brexit! Would it not be better to change the 4EU part to 4brexit, such a domains are available, for example both the generic .org and a .org.uk – just checked.

      • acorn
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

        Jerry, I told them similar a year back; they added the Brexit prefix and the URL does work OK; but, the front page is far too “busy” and lacks impact.

        Its the same old lesson you get taught about designing political campaign leaflets. You have got the distance from the letterbox to the kitchen waste bin, to get your message across to the reader of your leaflet.

    • Leslie Singleton
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      Dear Facts & John–Agree totally that what Blair has just said is preposterous but the trouble is he is right in a way, which is that the longer Mrs May delays triggering the more it becomes reasonable for the cry to go up that the country, being more knowledgeable about what Brexit means with the passage of time, should indeed have a chance “to change its mind”. The price the majority might have to pay for this stuff about doing our homework till March could be a big one, possibly existential, as they say these days, for Brexit. And of course those taking a tilt at Mrs May well remember that she, not to mention Hammond, was a Remainer. Doubt will subsist.

    • Mark B
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:19 am | Permalink

      THE FACTS – What staying a member of the Single Market means

      1. True. But EU immigration, which the UK government cannot control, is far lower than non-EU immigration which they can. Question is. If the UK government is serious about controlling numbers, why does it not limit those it can ????

      2. Untrue. Membership of the EEA does not include ECJ. It is monitored here:

      http://www.efta.int/legal-texts/the-surveillance-and-court-agreement

      3. Untrue. Whilst it is true that EEA member countries do contribute, they do so on a far smaller scale and only in policy areas that they agree with.

      http://www.efta.int/eea/eu-programmes

      4. I do not have the fact to support or confront your statistics. However, I assume those figures are trade figures and would continue much like now irrespective of our relationship with the EU. ie It is a mute point.

      5. And still will be. ie Mute point. What will be different is that we will be out of the, Cistoms Union which is NOT part of the EEA Agreement. See “What is the EEA Not?”

      http://www.efta.int/eea/eea-agreement

      6. True. But only to those selling into that market. The internal UK market will be unaffected.

      I am sorry but much of what you have written is uninformed propaganda. Please amend if you want people like me and others to take you more seriously.

      • Brexit Facts4EU.org
        Posted October 30, 2016 at 6:22 am | Permalink

        Mark B and others. Happy to respond to you on our site but please don’t use Mr Redwood’s site for this. He is responsible for his content and we are responsible for ours.
        Many thanks, the Facts4EU.org team

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:15 am | Permalink

        2. The EFTA court shadows the ECJ and the EFTA states have agreed to be bound by the decisions of the EFTA court. It is a myth that its decisions are merely “advisory”.

      • Brigham
        Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

        Mark B
        Does a mute point mean an unspoken one, or do you mean a moot point?

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 12:14 pm | Permalink

      There’s an easy logical reply to your article and to Mr Ummuna. Leaving trumps staying in the Single Market. Unless we can both leave and stay in the single market, we just leave.

  10. zorro
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:39 am | Permalink

    I think that tells you all you need to know about Blair’s commitment to democracy….. As has his subsequent support to certain countries and their rulers. Unless you are part of his progressive agenda and think like him you are not a democrat and your view is certainly of no worth, and a candidate for rendition somewhere……

    zorro

  11. Jerry
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:09 am | Permalink

    Totally agree John, and whilst I have called for either parliamentary votes or further referenda myself I have never called for the “If” question to be re-run, the electorate have spoken and chosen Brexit, and that should be that Mr Blair!

    My objection is simply the way some on the europhobic right are trying to force their personal or small ‘group-think’ views as to when and what Brexit should be upon everyone else, the 17 odd million who voted Brexit (never mind those who voted Remain or did not cast any vote, for what ever reason) who they do not necessarily speak for. Something like 28 different Brexit groups campaigned for exit, often with widely differing reasons for why the UK should leave.

  12. stred
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    The idea of Tony Blair leading an army of ‘insurgents’, hell bent on keeping the UK in a German lead EU is beyond a joke. This deluded actor is fooling himself again. But he does it with style and will fool some feeble minded Libdums. Farron could be his second in command. If they succeeded they may find themselves like Tony’s one- time associate Gadaffi running up a drain pipe but finding an unfriendly welcome at both ends.

  13. Lifelogic
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    Why does Mr Blair now think all these conventions and rules have been suspended, because he this time was on the losing side?

    Perhaps because he feels that with so many Tory MPs and indeed most of the Cabinet & government being remainers or ex-remainers he can still defeat the will of the voters. I wish that I could be more sure that he is not right in this view. Thanks to Cameron’s lefty, high taxing, pro EU, greencrap, expensive energy, rather lefty agenda the Tory majority is tiny. It is only a majority thank to Ed and the SNP being so dire. Also thanks to Cameron’s poor choice for London Mayor and candidates it is reducing yet further.

  14. Spike
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:23 am | Permalink

    Blair had been to see Francoise Hollande the day before so there may have been some quid pro quo involved.

  15. graham1946
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    Mr Blair does not seem to realise that the vote to leave was probably mainly his fault and that of Labour policy. The Lisbon Treaty was not going to be signed, then it was, more or less covertly by Gordon Brown.
    Open door immigration, especially of the eastern accession countries was allowed when it was not necessary, because Blair thought it was an electoral advantage to Labour and in the words of his spokesman ‘to rub the right’s nose in diversity’. Other countries had the moratorium allowed on this but he, in his infinite wisdom ‘knew better.’
    Mr Blair wanted us to join the Euro but we were saved by his poor relations with Gordon Brown who objected, mostly, I suspect, not out of great forward knowledge, but because it would upset Blair.
    He took us into what most people now regard as an illegal war and mislead parliament etc ed
    This current intervention shows his total lack of self awareness and his arrogance, which has gone a long way to making politics in this country to be held in low regard. All of this is his direct responsibility and he has done nothing since his retirement from UK politics to endear him to the populace and his self enrichment schemes, purely based on contacts and friendships made in office rather than ability, particularly in America have lead to his being held in the lowest esteem. Even his own Labour Party do not wish to hear from him but he still thinks he is a world leader. The BBC aid him in his fantasies whereas he is actually reviled in this country and his intervention is good news for Brexit as it will cement people’s knowledge that they made the correct decision.
    A considerable time of silence from him, preferably for ever would be most welcome and he should go away count his money and good fortune that he has not been personally held to account.

  16. Richard1
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:32 am | Permalink

    There would be a case for another referendum if and only if there was a substantially different deal on offer from the EU than the one the U.K. Rejected at the referendum.

    • matthu
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:51 pm | Permalink

      No.

      • Richard1
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:08 pm | Permalink

        I don’t see anything against the principle – so long as it’s a totally different deal. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is where we end up after the German election – the same place we could have ended up if Mr Cameron had played a better hand.

        • Monty
          Posted October 31, 2016 at 1:20 am | Permalink

          No way.
          We voted to leave. Nobody gets to short-change us on that. No-one has any mandate to engage in any negotiations, or to entertain any offers or inducements, that would include the UK staying in the EU on any terms.

        • David Price
          Posted October 31, 2016 at 5:19 am | Permalink

          There is no case for another referendum until after the government has implemented the last one.

          “In principle” an Article 50 notification should have been made the day after the referendum since the leaflet was made very clear that the government would implement the result.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:33 pm | Permalink

      We want nothing beyond a normal free trade agreement and cooperation, which would benefit them more than us anyway.

      • Richard1
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

        As with every other walk of life – business for instance – we need to deal with the world as we find it. There will need to be face saving compromises on both sides.

  17. Dr. Gary M. Skinner
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:32 am | Permalink

    That is not what he said at all. He said the result of the 23rd June was clear and could not be reversed. What he was saying was that given that we have no idea what Brexit is going to be, or how damaging it is going to be, the people should have a chance to be heard on whether they accept the deal or not. It is more democracy, not less.

    Your GE analogy is interesting, as the people do indeed get a periodic chance to be heard, we don’t have one GE and the forever have the same government, why should a decision made in a referendum be any different? We re-voted on 1975, after all, one could argue quite rightly, given how much the EEC had changed. Why not re-voted when we actually know what for?

    As I said, more democracy, not less, unless you feel that the people will somehow make the “wrong” choice?

    • Original Richard
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

      Dr. Gary M. Skinner :

      “What he was saying was that given that we have no idea what Brexit is going to be, or how damaging it is going to be, the people should have a chance to be heard on whether they accept the deal or not.”

      Millions voting for Brexit did not care how Brexit was going to be as anything was preferable to being a member of the EU.

      In fact, if it weren’t for the threats of dire economic consequences and the possibility of our exit leading to WW3 I expect the ratio of Brexit/Remain would have been 75/25.

      Even today, Remainers always start by saying, “The EU is far from perfect but….”

    • JoeSoap
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:36 am | Permalink

      So another vote in 2057, you mean?
      I can’t see anybody arguing with that today.

      • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
        Posted October 31, 2016 at 11:24 am | Permalink

        It won’t take 40 years, for the reasons below:

        Leave had to overcome a much larger majority: 67% Remain to 33% Leave in 1975. Such a huge shift was always going to take a long time. 2016 was only 51.9%:48.1, a much slighter margin, and so much quicker to change, in 2 years it most likely would have done so, simply due to the demographic shifts. Why would you then want to implement something that most of the electorate don’t want at that point? In a GE, the government elected takes office right away, not 3 years down the road. Enacting Brexit in 2019 is probably the most undemocratic thing that could happen. There needs to be another vote on whether we accept/reject the Brexit deal on offer.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:07 am | Permalink

      I’ve no objection in principle to a referendum on the final deal, I just have a problem working out what realistic choices could be on the ballot paper. Plus, I think it is unlikely that there will be just a single comprehensive UK-EU deal.

    • David Price
      Posted October 31, 2016 at 5:29 am | Permalink

      People voted in the referendum on the clear basis that the government would implement what we decided. We decided to leave the EU so that is what the government must deliver, leave the EU completely and it’s associated apparatus.

      If you want more democracy then perhaps you could arrange for all subsequent treaties and arrangements after we have left.

      Blair gave no opportunity for voters to be heard when he took this country to war and that has proved hugely damaging for many people over a protracted period.

      Blair is not an arbiter of democracy.

      • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
        Posted October 31, 2016 at 11:18 am | Permalink

        What he is saying is that is it perfectly possible for people to change their minds, especially when they can actually see what it is they voted for. Our democratic process should allow the option for such an important issue to be revisited, as circumstances change. More democracy, not less. It is not about re-voting until we get the “right” result. The result will always be the democratic will of the people, and that can change. Why would you want to enact a policy that most people actually disagree with, or why would you now want to find out if indeed most people do agree with it?

        • Juliet
          Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:06 pm | Permalink

          Our democratic process gave those eligible to vote a once in a lifetime vote, some chose to vote, some were undecided, some chose not to vote, but we all had choice to vote on the day or via post.

          This thing the ‘Remain’ camp have about changing minds is wearing a bit thin now. Leave Voters didn’t make the biggest decision of their life only to have it compromised with a few choice words of (The result will always be the democratic will of the people, and that can change) you message is cleverly crafted to confuse.

          Did people know what they voted for in 1975 – yes,
          Did people know what they voted for in 2016 – yes,

          No one is more qualified than you to decide what your life will be, we already weighed up the pros and cons when we ticked the box, Leave voters, voted for change not more of the same. It’s time to draw a line, either be on the journey or watch in the distance, because there will NOT be a second referendum. The democratic will of 17m people is to leave the EU system

          March 2017 Article 50 will be invoked,
          Mandate will be formalised,
          The Deal will be constructed

          • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
            Posted November 2, 2016 at 8:10 am | Permalink

            People don’t even have to change their minds. The demographic shift alone will change the result. There is nothing about the referendum legislation or statute that required it to be “once in a lifetime”, that was pure campaign hyperbole. The ones who this decision will affect the most had no voice at all. There is no legal reason a subsequent referendum cannot be held on a different question, namely do we accept the resulting Brexit deal? Why would you argue for less democracy, and possibly enact a policy the majority of the electorate oppose in 2019?

      • David Price
        Posted November 1, 2016 at 5:12 am | Permalink

        … arrange for referendums for all subsequent treaties and arrangements after we have left

  18. Ian Wragg
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:33 am | Permalink

    You must blame the BBC for giving oxygen to the likes of Bliar,Gandolf and Lizzard.
    The BBC is the unofficial opposition and treats every piece of good news with contempt.
    I see Switzerland is having a second referendum on limiting immigration. Hopefully the people will take heart from the Brexit vote and decide by an even larger majority to end free movement.
    The EU really is under threat.

  19. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:49 am | Permalink

    If Blair had exercised some sensible caution over the impact of EU enlargement to include countries in eastern Europe which had been left poor by four decades of communism then probably a majority of UK citizens would have preferred to stay in the EU. There would have been a sizable minority who still wanted to leave the EU for other reasons but the balance has been tipped by the uncontrolled and unlimited immigration which he thought, and very likely still thinks, was a wonderful idea even if the British people didn’t want it. Arguably he has the most responsibility of anybody for breaking his own beloved EU, although I don’t suppose that he sees that himself.

    • Juliet
      Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

      I think in hindsight knowing what we know now, I believe a Referendum would have happened back in 1992. And we would be like two of the richest countries in Europe ‘Norway and Switzerland’. Our industries would be more prosperous, (agriculture, manufacturing). When political leader had the choice to carry on the EU as free trade zone or look ahead to integrate (political & economic) and introduce the single currency, even thought Greece had a weak economy, they were still allowed to join the Euro, and that should have told us it was time to exit the EU. Blair deliberately misled everyone about the EU enlargement (no one knew what to expect). Instead of transitioning and waiting like France and Germany, he decided to take the lead and left us with a mess and because of that anti-immigration sentiment has become the new normal.

  20. Iannorth yorks
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:54 am | Permalink

    He continues to follow the attitude of EU organisations: ‘keep voting until you give us the result we want’

    • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

      But when/if they give that result, it will be through democratic means, so at that point it will be the “will of the people”, so what’s the problem?

      • Ozo
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

        How many votes do you want…best of three? The will of the people is clear. Any more attempts to obfuscate or delay the final outcome merely introduce uncertainty and increase the risk of an adverse outcome. Strange how the remainers have a sudden interest in the sovereignty of parliament after handing it over incrementally to the EU, hypocrites.

        • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
          Posted November 2, 2016 at 8:15 am | Permalink

          Well, why not best of three? Leave have been the ones pushing for another vote for 41 years. The question was already “settled” in 1975. Why does anyone think Remain will give up, when Leave never did?

      • Original Richard
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

        Dr. Gary M. Skinner :

        “But when/if they give that result, it will be through democratic means, so at that point it will be the “will of the people”, so what’s the problem?”

        When the EU gets the decision it wants then there are no further referendums allowed – ever.

        • Dr. Gary M. Skinner
          Posted November 3, 2016 at 8:10 am | Permalink

          Isn’t this the situation we have now, only it’s the result the Leavers wanted, instead of Retainers? So, now you got that result, no further referendums allowed – ever?

  21. Caterpillar
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    Spot on. Unlike general elections the referendum was unweighted and national, apart from project fear it made a refreshing change from the biases that usually/have to exist in elections of representatives.

    Perhaps Mr Blair is still angling for a European position.

  22. Brian Tomkinson
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:00 am | Permalink

    As I have written several times before, there is a powerful group of politicians, media broadcasters and others who are doing all they can to thwart the will of the Bristish people. Delaying implementing Article 50 plays into their hands by giving them more time and hope to overturn the result of the referendum.

    • Ozo
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:54 pm | Permalink

      They are playing a very dangerous game if they think they are more powerful than 17.4 m people. We can get rid of the lot of them.

  23. wab
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:02 am | Permalink

    In the past Mr Redwood claimed to believe that Parliament is sovereign, and in fact that was allegedly one of the reasons to get out of the EU. Except now Mr Redwood apparently doesn’t believe that Parliament is sovereign, the people are (at least when the people happen to agree with Mr Redwood). It is not just Blair who is a hypocrite.

    Reply Parliament said the people should decide the EU issue, which we have now done. So all is well and there is no hypocrisy

    • old salt
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

      Do I not remember our then PM promised to invoke Article 50 the morning after should Leave be in the ascendancy?

      • Caterpillar
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:18 pm | Permalink

        Old Salt,

        It was reported as such, hence there were several attempts at petitions to remind parliament of this. Perhaps the correlation between what (it is reported that) PM’s say and what they do is not perfect

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:11 am | Permalink

        Well surely by this stage you did not believe a word Cameron said did you? We had had him claiming to be a “low tax Conservative at heart” while increasing taxes hand over fist, claiming to be a EUROsceptic, we had his Cast Iron lie, a treaty is not a treaty once ratified lie, his “my priority in three letters is the NHS”, I will stay on after a Brexit vote …… almost nothing he ever said was true. If his lips were moving he was probably lying. Rather like Blair in fact.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:14 am | Permalink

          He even claimed they were “repaying the debt”, there was no end to his endless lies.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 9:00 am | Permalink

      Parliament said that the decision – the final decision – would be referred back to the people as a whole, but on the assumption that the people could then be frightened into agreeing with what Parliament wanted …

  24. Janice Birch
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:03 am | Permalink

    Thank you to Mr Redwood for pointing out the total arrogance of Blair: trying to make a come back into British politics at the expense of GB democracy!
    Thank you also to Brexit Facts for the feature on lightweight so called political journalists
    who earn big salaries to focus on personalities rather than facts!

  25. Iain Moore
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    You make the mistake in thinking the EU project should be judge on democratic values, when it was an elitist project that ruthlessly hollowed out democracies and disenfranchised people and only gave a superficial nod to democracy when it suited their purpose.

    It now suits their purpose to claim democratic values in an attempt to frustrate the will of the people and recover as much as they can of their project. The fact that their actions show breath taking hypocrisy isn’t something they can be embarrassed about, for they never cared what people think, and never cared to get a democratic mandate for their actions, for they were always motivated by the desire to accrue power to themselves.

  26. DaveM
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:13 am | Permalink

    Mr Blair is only listened to by the BBC because he says what they want to hear. To everyone else, what comes out of his mouth is “blah blah blah..I’m going to lose my EU money…blah blah”.

    • old salt
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

      Why the surprise with the EU funded BBC.

  27. Jane Moorhouse
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    It was he who signed the Lisbon Treaty without referendum and took us into Iraq. Our present mess has his hands written all over it. I think it would be good for him to retire, shut up and keep his views to himself.

  28. JoolsB
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:25 am | Permalink

    Labour hasn’t won the popular vote in England since 2001 yet it took until 2015 for England to get the government of it’s choosing. Another reason England needs it’s own parliament. Why should Scotland, Wales & NI get two votes to England’s one, one to choose to their own self determining governments and another to choose who governs England?

  29. fedupsoutherner
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    The audacity of all those that oppose Brexit knows no bounds. You just have to listen to them, including those in your own government John, like Sourby, and Morgan to see that they would overturn the will of the majority in an instant. Blair is no doubt being aided and abetted by his wife in all of this hoping to thwart justice and overturn the vote.

    I hope to God that the courts are on our side when they come to decide because if not, we are going to have a hell of an unhappy country afterwards.

  30. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:10 am | Permalink

    Off-topic, the Telegraph has an article about the biannual fiddling with our clocks which doesn’t mention our current legal obligations under the EU Directive:

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32000L0084

    In contrast to previous years, however, I can now say that there may come a time in the next few years when these public discussions will no longer be pointless.

    We will be able to have our own debate and make our decision about whether those Tories in south east England having longer evenings to play tennis is or is not more important than people in Northern Ireland having to wait until late morning before it gets light … we might even care to look at the EU Commission’s review in 2007, which seemed to show that it is all pretty pointless and really not worth the bother:

    http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:52007DC0739

    “In Bulgaria, a statistical analysis carried out by the operator of the electricity system covering electricity consumption over the last three years shows that savings have resulted from non-use of artificial lighting estimated at 20.5 GWh per year, i.e. about 0.01% of the country’s overall consumption in 2005.”

    However we may not be freed to make our own decision if Theresa May gives in to pressure and tries to keep us in the EEA, and she then manages to persuade everybody including Wallonia to agree to the necessary adjustments to the EEA Agreement.

  31. NoMoreEU
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:18 am | Permalink

    Even Blair is scratching around trying to find evidence of the predicted IMMEDIATE financial Armageddon we were promised.

    He ‘clutched at the straw’ – the fall in the pound…20% against the dollar.

    Looking at the currency markets, the Euro fell a whopping 30% against the dollar, between May 2014 and now. It has never recovered that lost ground.

    Since Europe = Good …it should be heartwarming for Mr Blair, to see the pound following the trend setting Euro.

  32. Ian Saunderson
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:24 am | Permalink

    Brilliant.

  33. James Matthews
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Correct in every particular, but no one should be surprised by the charlatan Blair, Like Paddy Ashdown and much of the left he accepts democracy only when he agrees with the outcome.

  34. adams
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:37 am | Permalink

    Judging by your post today you are in favour of PR voting in General Elections . Am I right ?
    Please sign Chuka Umanas Early Day Motion on electoral reform . EDM 521 I think it is .
    A fairer voting system for all is what is needed . Mrs May says a Britain that works for everybody . At the moment FPTP only works for the Tories ,Liebour and the SNP .
    Time for real change not more re-aranging of the deck chairs .

  35. Newmania
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    We had a vote so shut up ! Impressive thinking no doubt, but within the appealing simplicity of this position are a number of extraordinary propositions
    The first is that a one off irreversible plebiscite is comparable with the subtle negotiation of a mature electoral system .
    The second is that the bag of mutually contradictory lies is in any sense a manifesto .
    The third , contradictory point , is that said ”mature democracy” should be set aside in case it fails to provide a group of extremists with the answer they want.

    I can see the rhetorical purpose of this approach but surely John he sees how intellectually threadbare it is ? () I may retrun to this when I get back from shopping ..)

  36. Mark B
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    They same could be said of all the other, ‘supposedly’, Nationalist parties. On the one hand, they claim that their supporters have given them a mandate to govern yet, when a decision is taken on a UK basis and the result, mostly at the hands of England, goes against them they cry foul.

    In 2014 the Scottish people were given a referendum. They where asked if they wished to remain part of the UK. The SNP campaigned to leave the UK. Had they won they were told that talks would begin on the break-up. Of course, they lost the vote, but in fairness never complained about the result. They knew that Foreign Policy is a UK / EU competence and that they, the Nationalists, have no say on the matter. The referendum on membership of the EU is a Foreign Policy matter of which Scottish MP’s sitting in a UK parliament could debate on. So they knew what was at stake if the referendum produced a Leave result, which as we all know, it did. So to suddenly it is OK to question a result and its meaning, and to piggy-back other issues that have no relation (Scottish independence) to what we ALL voted on.

    A precedent has been set. In 2014, three men signed a piece of paper written by a fourth. It committed the signatories to promises should Scotland decode to remain part of the UK. Such a piece of paper was used as a pretext to give Scottish Government more powers than ever before. powers that no one, up to that point, had promised, and no one in parliament or the nation had ever voted for. This was not only a cynical plot to grab Nationalist vote but, a means to curry favour with those same people a head of any forthcoming GE for a failing Scottish Labour Party and its UK MP’s. It did not work !

    The things is; if ‘The Three Unwise Men’ could commit a government, a parliament and a nation to a course of action with no debate or vote by the rest of the UK, then why cannot a UK government & parliament keep a simple promise that they made many months ago ?

    If the SNP and others Nationalists feel that the UK (actually they really see it as England) cannot leave the EU without their consent / approval, then it is also right that those same Home Nations status (IN or OUT) within the UK should be up for debate, particularly by England ?

    It is only fair.

    • JoolsB
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

      Totally agree Mark B but fairness doesn’t apply to England does it John? In fact, as usual, any debate would only include Scotland, Wales, NI and the UK Government and what they want. As far as this Tory Government, there by the grace of England, is concerned and the Labour Government before it, England doesn’t exist

  37. Edward.
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:05 am | Permalink

    A preposterous, political prestidigitator, one wonders what did the people ever really see in him [Mr. Blair] and now that they know him and all of his works, a cry from the darkness this way cometh.

    Blair, the man who and though it was made a clear election manifesto promise, then flatly refused to offer the British people a referendum on, the Lisbon EU constitution treaty and now that, he [Mr. Blair] is no longer the PM of Britain: posits nay demands a third EU referendum?

    May the devil take you home Mr. Blair, for you are not wanted here – in Britain.

  38. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:46 am | Permalink

    Off-topic, yet another instance of the degeneration of the once highly esteemed Times newspaper into an organ of pro-EU, anti-Brexit, propaganda.

    http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/may-called-for-mps-to-have-veto-on-talks-with-brussels-xz33963g5

    “May called for MPs to have veto on talks with Brussels”

    By Dominic Kennedy, “Investigations Editor”.

    “Theresa May’s insistence that parliament should be kept in the dark about her Brexit strategy was undermined yesterday after it emerged that she had written a paper demanding MPs get the right to veto European negotiations.”

    Maybe he had noticed this stunning revelation back in July:

    http://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2016/07/profile-nick-timothy-mays-thinker-in-chief-and-co-chief-of-staff.html

    “Profile: Nick Timothy, May’s thinker-in-chief and co-Chief of Staff”

    “Before long, he found himself working for Theresa May. In 2007, they published a joint booklet under the sombre and determinedly Eurosceptic title, Restoring Parliamentary Authority: EU Laws and British Scrutiny.”

    http://www.politeia.co.uk/publications/restoring-parliamentary-authority-eu-laws-and-british-scrutiny

    The part of the Times article I can read free does not seem to reflect the arguments of that paper, according to the press release for the latter:

    http://politeia.co.uk/p98pr.pdf

    “Each year around 1,000 EU measures become law in the UK. Most of these are never debated in the House of Commons. Many are not even considered by the Committees of the House. Theresa May, Shadow Leader of the House of Commons, explains in Politeia’s next pamphlet that there is a failure of scrutiny. Parliament, under the present system, is unable to hold the Government to account over many EU laws.”

    Nothing special there to be investigated, just pretty standard fare for the Tory party at that time, and in fact 18 months before that pamphlet was published Theresa May had joined other Tory MPs in voting for unacceptable EU laws to be disapplied “notwithstanding the European Communities Act 1972” with full approval from the party whips.

  39. Robert 279
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:48 am | Permalink

    I noticed, in his BBC interview, that Mr Blair, like all remainers who are determined to impede our departure, began by saying, ‘I respect the will of the people’. In fact he repeated it, for good measure, later in that interview.

    For weeks I’ve been struggling to understand the dissonance, trying to fathom what psychological processes are taking place that allows for such diametrically opposed words and actions. Mr Blair’s timely intervention has reminded me. It’s called lying.

  40. Mark
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:54 am | Permalink

    If Blair really think that the UK should stay in the EU, he should be spending his time persuading the EU to make the UK a better offer than the Cameron “renegotiation” the UK just rejected. I see no sign that the EU will consider that (indeed, their first act was to say that even the Cameron terms were no longer available), so out we go in accordance with our judgement that the EU is not for us. It’s looking more and more like the correct judgement with each passing day.

    • matthu
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

      You seem to be ignoring the fact that the opportunity to make the UK a better offer has long passed.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:30 pm | Permalink

        Matthu

        Was this offer ever there in the first place?

      • Mark
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:15 pm | Permalink

        The opportunity is there while we are still a member of the EU under article 50(3). It does require unanimous agreement – including our agreement, which probably would require a further referendum. So in practice they have about 18 months after we submit Article 50 notice to give time for the rest of the process. However, there would be no point in submitting anything less than a substantially improved offer.

        The odd thing is it is the EU who are under time negotiating pressure if they want to achieve this route – otherwise, the UK could only rejoin via the far less advantageous Article 49 procedure. Meanwhile, the EU has an ongoing obligation to negotiate the exit agreement whether or not the UK is still a member under 50(2). If they are intransigent, we can just sit back and not conclude the agreement for the time being – we can wait for different politicians to be running the show.

  41. formula57
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    The opportunity for Mr Blair to make his devious pronouncement is afforded to him by the government’s apparent inability to either show that “Brexit means Brexit” or to get on with delivering it. Let us hope that the price of government dithering is not paid in the sort of future Mr Blair wishes for us.

    (Doolittle and Spendlove will be rejoicing, I expect.)

  42. acorn
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 11:17 am | Permalink

    It won’t be long now before the beleaguered citizens of the UK, will be looking for a messiah to rescue them from the alien force that is Westminster. A Donald Trump type character, but much more reserved British style. Someone who has made most of the political mistakes as a national leader and hasn’t got many more left to make.

    A messiah with a global footprint, who could single handedly, take apart the EU and rebuild it without the Euro currency and the Stability and Growth Pact.

    Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you Anthony Charles Lynton “Tony” Blair. Our next Prime Minister and future President of Presidents of the European Dis-Union!!!

  43. Iain Gill
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 11:20 am | Permalink

    Blair is a disgrace.

    He is the absolute worst kind of politician, no moral compass

    Arrogance of the supreme kind

    And failure after failure after failure

    • matthu
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:58 pm | Permalink

      Nothing is more likely to unite Brexiteers than a Blairite-led movement to hold another referendum.

      • matthu
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

        I forgot about Peter Mandelson.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:31 pm | Permalink

      Iain

      A very rich failure though.

  44. EU forever
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 11:50 am | Permalink

    Why don’t the Remainers go and live in the EU?

    Tony Blair could easily move. The rest of the Remainers serenaded the idea British people are free to live and work in the EU. So go! Go! Don’t stay on a sinking ship! Off you go to the EU paradise you wished to inflict on others. You’ll get used to their form of democracy in time. It’s just like being at work here though in your own personal and private time…keep schtum! Clap and look gleeful as whenever your boss comes out with something a bit more sensible than a mentally challenged parrot. Be a real EU-er!

  45. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

    I’m sure he’s not the only one.

    I can envisage himself, Major, Clegg and Cameron, at least, in a cohort to appeal for people to “come to their senses”.

    Let’s be generous. Respond that the day they can get more than 50% of British people of voting age, by signed petition, to meet their view, is the day we have another referendum. Until then, the case is already proven against them. By the way, if they do then lose again, they pay the costs, including those of wasting people’s time @ £50 per vote.
    Blair should be able to meet that alone.

  46. Brigham
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

    I am unable to comment on Blair. Our host tends to censor a lot of my posts with even mild expletives, so nothing of my opinion of this chancer would get through.

  47. Peter Wood
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    Why is this man still protected by the ‘establishment’? Mr. Redwood, he comes from your cloth, its time to change and reject such arcane conventions and have common justice done.

  48. Anna
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

    Imagine that the referendum had produced a Remain result. Imagine that the Leavers constantly railed against the verdict of the people. Imagine that they described themselves as ‘insurgents’ and threatened to organise and protest and attempt to thwart the result at every turn, including legal action. Imagine how they would be denounced by the Remainers for their failure to abide by a democratic decision! I speak as a reluctant Remainer, once terrified by the lies of Project Fear and now fully committed to Brexit and hopeful that it will be a success.

  49. NA
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

    During the 7/7 enquiry didnt Theresa May say she would rather resign than have MI5 give testimony? I think that tells us all we need to know. I could be pleasantly surprised but somehow I doubt it. I think she is playing a hegel dialectic.

  50. Margaret
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Its awful when you can’t get your own way….poor man

  51. Dennis
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

    Off topic:- What was the UK’s input/stance on the EU/Canada/CEPA negotiations? I haven’t seen/heard a word about it.

    • Dennis
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

      I meant CETA.

      CEPA is the asian trade agreement.

  52. Sean
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

    I’m sick and tired of stupid civil servants ( politicians ) no listening or not wanting to take any notice if the people. I lose faith in most if them.

  53. Bob
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Tony Blair did a grand job as Middle East Peace Envoy, it’s such a peaceful place now.
    We should listen carefully to his words of wisdom.

    I suppose they’ll be trotting out Major & Mandelson next.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

      Bob, God help us and the rest of the world.

    • Bob
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 10:17 am | Permalink

      as I predicted Lord Mandelson has surfaced with an article in the Daily Mail suggesting we continue paying into the EU budget, and surprisingly one of the Tory Brexit campaign MPs Nadhim Zahawi has backed him up with a similar article in the same paper.

      The enemy within.

  54. Kevin
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 3:43 pm | Permalink

    During the Iraq War, Tony Blair delivered a lecture titled, “Our Nation’s Future – Defence” (12/1/2007), in which he made the following remark:
    “No two democracies have ever been to war.”

    This is a very powerful statement. It is odd that Blair should now act as if democracy is dispensable.

  55. Bryan Harris
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 4:36 pm | Permalink

    John – I doubt Mr Blair could be bothered to read your blog – which is unfortunate as its damned impressive at times, but would it be worth sending him a copy of this one?

    Clearly Blair is still waiting for the call from the EU elite to become one of their many presidents. It’s not that he has an ambition to do something great, he just wants to be in a position of power where he can gloat and look impressive, but we all know he did very little worthwhile during his 3 terms. TBH I can’t recall one thing that made me admire him.

    Blair has the same attitude as the EU elite, as well as people like Clegg and others, who believe that they know best what is good for humanity, and find any democratic intervention to be most annoying. They feel they should rule, as the EU commission does, without responsibility or accountability.

  56. Pro Blair
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:00 pm | Permalink

    It is undeniable given the Leave result that the Remain Campaign was far too professional in the sense of overly organised for its own good. This was due to the lack of practical grassroots experience of campaigning and canvassing at the very top.
    By contrast the Leave Campaign was nearly always amateurish and self-contradictory. But this is how many a human mind works. It is not robotic and Life in general is as we all know, full of seemingly contradictory elements.So the Leave arguments however cumbersome were made real.
    What the Leave Campaign did NOT say was

    A/ That the promise made by Mr Cameron to lead the country after a Leave vote would not be kept.

    B/ That a new Cabinet and and new Prime Minister would be formed immediately after a Leave vote, without a General Election.

    C/ That negotiations with the EU and other interested parties would be held in secret. In this connection, Mr Lidington MP, still a senior actor, promised Parliament in answer to a question prior to the Referendum that every single piece of the negotiation would be placed before Parliament ongoing as a whole for intricate scrutiny.

    Therefore the underlying expected conditions upon a successful Leave result have not been met.

    This does not invalidate the vote to Leave: it does invalidate the behaviour of government based on the result.

    The government has no electoral mandate to proceed as indicated post-Brexit. The Leavers are day-by-day undermining and invalidating the Will of the People. It is they, who are behaving with utter contempt for the people of the United Kingdom. They do dishonour to Democracy.

    • James Matthews
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:53 pm | Permalink

      The British public voted on a clear binary question. No ifs, no buts, no caveats, no reservations, no what ifs. They voted to leave despite the best efforts of almost all of the British establishment and broadcast media (and those of much of the western world) to frighten them into voting to remain.

      If the result had been reversed would the Remainders pay the slightest attention to claims that expected preconditions (e.g.,. no preparation for a European Army, no realistic prospect of Turkish membership) had not been fulfilled?

      Of course not. It would have been taken as a mandate to proceed at maximum speed towards ever closer union, to be implemented with much greater enthusiasm than is being demonstrated by the caution of those charged with organising Britain’s departure.

      Blair, like most Remainders, can’t accept that he lost and demands that we go on voting until we get it right (thus giving credence to those who believe that if voting changed anything it wouldn’t be allowed). He should spend more time with his £Millions.

      • Wasp
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

        “No ifs, no buts, no caveats, no reservations, no what ifs ” is the phrase used by a PM no longer there, succeeded by a NEW government . The leave vote was a “clear binary question” not an invitation for a Tory party coup and the flouting of the democratic will of the British people.
        Now, honour the Leave vote! Stop adding to its significance and import because Mrs May has, unarguably actually, a prettier face than her predecessor.
        The mandate is the signing of Article 50 immediately after the Leave vote. That is for the unclear of mind 24th June 2016…not “no later than March 2017” Also, as outlined by PM Cameron “Out of the Single Market” on june 24th 2016.
        Everything else including a secret trade deal with a foreign company from Japan possibly with the future promise of tax-payers money was not part of the “binary question”. So why was it done? Dictatorship.

        • NA
          Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:55 pm | Permalink

          The mandate is the signing of Article 50 immediately after the Leave vote.

          >
          Theresa May is the master of sounding tough and convincing but working for the opposite ends. She is stalling until March 2017 to allow the media to work their propaganda in-between.

      • Thorny
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

        The Leavers have failed. The UK remains a full paying member of the EU.

        No authorisations have been made by the Brexiteers to the EU to leave.

        Those are blatant abject and reprehensible and quite deliberate failures betrayals by the Brexiteers.
        Now what did you say? Did you mention the binary question? Well remember it! In what way has it been regarded? None at all!

        Now we have agreed on the betrayal and failure we must go on to the other things not in the failed referendum. No discussion in Parliament of trade deals… held in secret in defiance of basic democracy. No PM in power who has been elected. In fact no government in power elected by the UK people.

        The people of the UK lack a government which recognises the outcome of the referendum except in cheap words nor recognises basic democracy in election of a government and Prime Minister.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:38 pm | Permalink

        James Matthew

        It would have been taken as a mandate to proceed at maximum speed towards ever closer union, to be implemented with much greater enthusiasm than is being demonstrated by the caution of those charged with organising Britain’s departure.

        Yes, and if there is a second referendum (please God no) and the vote is reversed then the UK is finished as a sovereign nation. What will happen will happen so fast we wont’ have time to blink and the consequences will be disastrous in so many ways.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:46 am | Permalink

      “Therefore the underlying expected conditions upon a successful Leave result have not been met.”

      It’s as easy as that; a politician breaks his word, twice, and instead of putting in the Article 50 notice straight away, as he promised, and then sticking around to see us out of the EU he decides to run away and pursue some other career, as he promised, apparently that is somehow the fault of those who campaigned to leave the EU and now the new government has no mandate to proceed to take us out of the EU; the referendum result is in effect cancelled. and those who say otherwise are doing dishonour to democracy.

  57. acorn
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 5:15 pm | Permalink

    For those of you that haven’t yet built their own Brexit trading “Decision Tree”, in your favourite business software application, you can make a start by having a read of, “Derrick Wilkinson: The trade policy questions facing the UK on leaving the EU customs union”, at brexitcentral.com .

    There is, on the same site, “Bob Lyddon: We need to be out of the Single Market before the euro blows”. Alas, the author does not understand the unlimited capability of the Euro Currency ISSUER, the ECB, to pay any bill presented to it in Euro; and, the fundamental fact that the ECB is never going to run out of its own Euro currency.

    • Mark
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

      The consequence of endless money printing is debasement of the currency, and ultimately hyperinflation. They tried it in Zimbabwe.

      • acorn
        Posted October 31, 2016 at 7:30 am | Permalink

        Other way around. The supply side of the economy collapsed, there was less and less to buy. What was available, was auctioned off at higher and higher prices every day. The government had no option but inject more fiat currency into the economy to stop it grinding to a halt.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:19 am | Permalink

      Provided the ECB shareholders, and above all others Germany, agree to do that and thereby impose ever increasing contingent liabilities on their electorates. However I think the leading German politicians are so besotted with the EEC/EC/EU/USE project for geopolitical rather than economic reasons that they would be prepared to go a lot further to save it. Contrary to the opinions of many others I always said that it was very unlikely the eurocrats would let any country which had joined the euro drop out of it if there was still any possibility of keeping it in, by hook or by crook.

  58. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

    The Rt Hon Blair is entitled to his view.

    The result for Leave was substantial enough. Any mustering of anti-Leave sentiment is an unwelcome aftertaste in the mouths of the electorate. It will lead to bad news in a General Election for MPs opposing the result ( however flawed the pre-Referendum campaigning. )

    Cries of “We woz robbed!” is an understandable emotional reaction to a result one wished otherwise and it may have some legitimacy given the conduct of one or two referees. Yet we should be aware The People are players playing on both sides and they are their own referee and ultimately resent external interference ( Parliament, in their hearts, is “external” to them after their glorious once in a lifetime cup match ) Stay clear of their wrath.

  59. Derekk
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:23 pm | Permalink

    B liar Want’s REGIME CHANGE again. What a disgrace .IRAQ

  60. NA
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    We rely on people like John Redwood to keep the likes of Blair and Cameron in check, or the whole system breaks down. Keep up the good work John, I loved this article.

  61. NoMoreEU
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    Mrs May is making one big mistake, by her policy of not giving regular Brexit updates.

    By delaying the serving of Article 50 until March 2017 she has created a political vacuum.

    The Remain ranks have now reorganised and they have filled the vacuum with much hot air.

    May is losing the PR battle, and is on the’ kitten heeled back foot’.

    Remain statements are made and rebuttals follow.
    But May is not ‘Setting the Agenda’.

    Faced with strengthening opposition to Brexit and powerful voices in the BBC, Sky and ITV, something needs to be done – and quickly.

    During this time of great change, a regular Brexit update would calm and reassure .

    What is wrong with a regular Brexit news briefing, on TV?
    We expect progress and we should be told what is actually being achieved.

    I hope May has not made a fatal mistake by not communicating.

  62. Watcher
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

    US Networks instead of a non-descript pop/country song, they’ve stated playing “O can you see by the dawn’s early light “after and before each of Trump’s three-a-day rallies. A sign maybe.

  63. androcles
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:02 pm | Permalink

    We were told that referenda always go in favour of the status quo, that the PM had wanted 23 June because it would avoid the summer migrant and euro crises, give little time for the leavers to come up with a coherent case. £9 million was spent on leaflet to every household. World leaders were lined up to tell us how to vote. Economic catastrophe and world war were predicted. Voting registration was extended beyond the deadline in the belief that young remain backing voters would sign up.
    Now we are told that the vote was close, leavers were taken in by a slogan on a bus, they didn’t want to leave the single market, they felt excluded, it was the old, the dim and the fascists. Every bit of good news is greeted with “we have not left yet” while bad news is put down to brexit.
    The sooner the PM activates article 50 the better – I am not sure my television screen will survive if I see much more of Anna Soubry, Tim Farron and Tony Blair telling us that we should have another referendum and this time do as we are told.

  64. Lithiumites
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

    Nowadays,you never see Mr Blair in the company except in still photographs with the likes of Brown, Major, Cameron or May. Does the appearance of any one of them require their batteries taken out at the back of one of the others?

  65. Original Richard
    Posted October 29, 2016 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

    Whilst delaying the triggering of Article 50 brings the danger that the democratic decision of the UK to leave the EU could be overturned by a combination of Mr. Blair, Parliament, the BBC and the corporates, the delay will lead to Brexit increasing in popularity as the EU’s migrant and Euro crises worsen before our eyes.

  66. Mick
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 11:07 am | Permalink

    Just been watching the muppet clegg on peston on Sunday and him agreeing with Blair on everything, why are all these tv stations and some media papers giving them airtime, oh yes I know why because there all anti Brexit and will do everything they can to overturn the democratic vote of the people, I’ve said it before if they love Europe that much pack your bags and go live there

  67. Ed Mahony
    Posted October 30, 2016 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

    Mr Blair has no right to comment until he apologises for the Iraq War.

    • NA
      Posted October 30, 2016 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

      Mr Blair has no right to comment until he apologises for the Iraq War.

      >
      The pope still likes him and Bush so he thinks he is ok with God and has nothing to apologise for. BIG mistake.

      • Ed Mahony
        Posted October 31, 2016 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

        I’m not saying judge him as a person but as a politician.
        The Vatican came out strongly against the Iraq War.

        • NA
          Posted November 1, 2016 at 11:31 am | Permalink

          The Vatican came out strongly against the Iraq War.

          >
          I would expect, like Hillary, the Vatican know the importance of having a public and private position?

  68. Robin Smith
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 10:53 am | Permalink

    Like him or not, if, in the unlikely event the Labour Party selection committee selects him, Labour will regain power at the next opportunity. So uphold Mr. Corbyn’s position and things will proceed nicely.

  69. Richard Head
    Posted October 31, 2016 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

    BlIr is one of the few politicians making any sense at the moment: why commit to Brexit if it’s not in the countries best interest. He makes far more sense than the honourable member for Wokingham.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page