Farewell to Prime Minister May

The legacy interview with Mrs May by the BBC was predictably sympathetic from a BBC who has always been the mouthpiece of Project Fear and who refuses to run Project Opportunity for Brexit. They will not interview those of us with plans for a great future out of the EU cleanly on 31 October. There is no discussion of how we can spend the money, cheer up the economy, change laws, back a UK fishing industry, grow more of our own food and all the other advantages leaving can bring.

Throughout the long wasted months of the May premiership as she allowed delay after delay in proper Brexit preparation I asked myself if she was a very clever Remainer deliberately seeking to dilute, delay and maybe wreck Brexit, or if she was just naive in thinking there was a compromise between Remain and Leave which would unite MPs and the country.

It was true she surrounded herself with Remain in crucial roles. Her main official negotiator, her Chancellor, Business Secretary, Chief of Staff and her Deputy were all staunchly pro Remain. Her Brexit Secretaries were Leave but were marginalised and excluded from helping form what became the disastrous Chequers negotiating policy. Strong Leavers with a history of knowledge and understanding of how to do Brexit were excluded from government. Iain Duncan Smith on borders and migration, Owen Paterson on fishing and farming, Peter Lilley and Marcus Fish on trade, Bernard Jenkin on machinery of government, Theresa Villiers on Northern Ireland, Mark Francois on European politics, Bill Cash on constitution and law and others all had plenty of good advice and commitment but none were allowed to be Ministers. David Jones, a very able and committed Brexit department Minister was sacked, presumably because he was too good.

It was also clear from the beginning the One sided Withdrawal Agreement was rejected by a huge majority of the electorate, uniting Leave and Remain voters in condemnation, yet she ground on with it. It violated the Manifesto which said future relationship and Withdrawal issues had to be negotiated at the same tine and wrapped up in the two years allotted. Her eventual decision to delay exit also implies a wish to damage Brexit, overturning her stance that No deal is better than a bad deal. As the government limped on more and more Leave Ministers felt they had to resign, so the government became more and more Remain, cut off from the growing Leave and Brexit vote in the country. It was the decision to delay the exit which meant the Conservatives under Mrs May collapsed from a creditable 43% in February 2019 in expectation of a No Withdrawal Agreement departure to just 9% in the European election which followed the ignominy of giving in over departure. Much of the collapsed Conservative vote went to the Brexit party who campaigned for a No deal exit.

She says in her valedictory interview she underestimated the resolve on both sides against her compromise. So she claims she was trying to find a compromise between Leave and Remain. It is amazing she thought she could do this when both sides endlessly explained to her their positions. The Agreement was nothing like Brexit and quite unsaleable to Leave. To Remain it was obviously worse than staying in properly with voice and vote.

The May premiership fell into three phases. The first short one with the inherited majority was fine, with the PM laying out a sensible and firm approach to Brexit. The second phase after the election losses was also fine, with Mrs May working closely with the 110 strongly Leave MPs in the Conservative party to get the EU Withdrawal Act through. We did so despite the concerted opposition of up to a dozen or so Remain Conservative MPs. The third phase was when she decided to stop working with the 110 Leave MPs and side more with the minority of Remain MPs, including those in the Cabinet. That was the phase which led inevitably to her departure with no Brexit result. It was characterised by a blitz of negative publicity about a so called NO Deal Brexit, with Ministers fuelling the gloom and helping some of the misleading scare stories. It was unusual to see a government trying to talk down everything instead of being sensibly optimistic about prospects.

I reached the point where I decided it did not matter if it was a Remain plot or a massive well intended misjudgement. Either way it was enormously sad for our country that we wasted three years looking weak and foolish internationally because we would not just leave as required by voters. It has left both Remain and Leave voters unhappy. The country says get on with it. We voted to leave, not to stay in for another 21 to 45 months three years on, and certainly not to sign a Future Partnership Treaty which might well be much like staying in without voice or vote.

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


  1. Henry Carter
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 5:46 am | Permalink

    ” …. cut off from the growing Leave and Brexit vote in the country”. The Telegraph has already had to apologise and retract when Mr Johnson made this false claim in its pages. There is no growing Leave or Brexit vote – the tide is running in the opposite direction. I expect you will have the decency also to retract

    • Lifelogic
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:09 am | Permalink


      • Andy
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:34 am | Permalink

        How do you know it is nonsense? The European elections returned a majority for Remain parties. The general election returned a majority in favour of soft or no Brexit.

        Yes, there are a hard core of irreconcilable (mainly old) people who now want no deal – but there is no evidence that you are anything other than a small minority. Though I appreciate evidence is not your strong point.

        • L Jones
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:44 am | Permalink

          As opposed to you, Andy, who have no strong points whatsoever.
          Your ageism is more than tiresome now, especially to those of us here who are young. You don’t seem to care about making a fool of yourself and confirming to us all that you are a narrow-minded, ill-informed bigot.

          • bill brown
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

            L. Jones,

            Andy, might often use wrong language and should be told to stop, but using it yourself does not promote your cause

          • steve
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:34 pm | Permalink

            L Jones

            Please write in a polite and respectful way about Andy, especially when he disrespects the elderly.

            …..otherwise you might find your posts deleted while his are allowed to remain.

        • graham1946
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:33 am | Permalink

          ‘The European elections returned a majority for Remain’

          Not that discredited old saw again. You have been shown this is wrong but still promulgate nonsense as if it were fact – maybe you even believe it. In any event, even if it were true, the winners win. In our system the government is always in the minority when you add up all the different factions, but still govern.
          Again, the dig about the ‘old’. Let me tell you that mostly they gain maturity and wisdom with age, something you have not yet managed and with bigoted views like yours I doubt you ever will. Perhaps you would like to produce a fact or two to support your views, which you have been singularly unable to do up to now. To accuse LL of not being strong on evidence shows how ridiculous you are. Still, you do give us all a daily laugh.

          • Fedupsoutherner
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

            A daily laugh Graham? You could look at Andy’s posts once an hour and still have a chuckle.

        • Caterpillar
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:45 am | Permalink

          Leave voters only in referendum 17.4 million, total turnout European elections 17.2 million (Inc EU27 citizens in UK). The Remain vote had its second chance to get out, it didn’t.

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:56 am | Permalink

          Andy, YouGov polled Leave and Remain voters to find out which parties they had supported in the 2015 general election. Their result – which is obviously subject to polling error, but is much more accurate than your personal guess – is as follows (Remain/Leave):

          Conservative 39/61
          Labour 65/35
          LibDem 68/32
          Green 80/20

          So not only are Tory voters not like your crude characterisations, but neither are Labour and LibDems. You simply cannot claim that any party listed here has only Remain voters. Face it, Andy, you’re wrong. Again.

        • Lorna
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:56 am | Permalink

          Andy so the 75 Brexit Party M.EPs are just an a figment of imagination.?
          The ageism is deeply offensive

          “ it is useless to attempt to reason a man out a thing he was never reasoned into”
          Jonathan Swift

          • hefner
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 10:44 am | Permalink

            They are a figment of your imagination. 32% of the vote gave 29 Brexit Party MEPs among the the 73 UK ones. It was a very good result but they did not get the full slate.

        • Dioclese
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

          Andy. which planet were you on when the Brexit Party became the single largest party in the European Parliament?

          That’s the trouble with remainers. They wear tinted goggles all the time which filter out facts…

        • Otto
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

          I have just seen the result of the Men’s singles match. Lederer won against Djokovic,. How come? Ledera won more games than Djokovic. Just add them up.

          Right Andy?

      • bill brown
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:26 pm | Permalink


        Andy might not always be right , but on this one he is

        • steve
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:14 pm | Permalink

          bill brown

          “Andy might not always be right , but on this one he is”

          Yes sometimes he is capable, but not for example when he’s writing disrespectfully against pensioners – which is allowed, apparently.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

          Not really, almost all the Brexit and UKIP voters surely want to leave with very few exception. But one cannot assume that all the voters for Labour, Conservative, SNP, Plaid, Libdim, Greens and the rest “certainly” wanted to remain at all.

    • Ian Wragg
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:12 am | Permalink

      Try selling that to the Brexit Party.
      Failure to leave on 31st October will spell the end of the Tory Party.
      May is a downright disgrace.

      • bigneil
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:08 am | Permalink

        Just heard on the radio that a 12 year old has voted in the Tory leadership farce – -not much hope for Brexit or running this country if 12 year olds are being given the vote.

        • Woody
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

          Yet I keep reading about how the leave vote was entirely from geriatrics and therefore meaningless .. can’t do anything that pleases the remoaners can we.

      • steve
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

        Ian Wragg

        “May is a downright disgrace”

        They all are mate, every last one of ’em.

        You’re right about the Tories though, they’re toast. I find them to be a bunch of hypocrites……if they weren’t they would be fighting against political correctness, standing up for free speech, and above all standing up for
        England, but they don’t, truth is they’re in bed with everything that has pulled this country down.

        Next election they deserve to go the same way as Lib Lab – not just flushed down the toilet but viciously ram rodded past the U- bend once and for all.

    • J Bush
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:37 am | Permalink

      So perhaps you can explain why the Brexit Party did so well in the euro elections, when standing on a ‘leave with no deal’ ticket?

      • Andy
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:36 am | Permalink

        70% of voters did not vote for the Brexit Party and their leave with no deal ticket.


        • Dave Andrews
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:53 am | Permalink

          On the other hand >92% didn’t vote for pro-Remain parties in the Peterborough by-election. Obviously Remaining is a small minority issue, just amplified by parliamentarians, celebrity and the media completely unrepresentative of the population as a whole.

          In reality, most people don’t care much whether we are in or out. Give the electorate a referendum and they vote to leave. All the polls since are just noise, participated in only by those who retain a strong opinion on the matter.

        • J Bush
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:41 am | Permalink

          I’ll raise you 13% and with an explanation why your argument how you think election votes work in the UK is flawed.

          GE’s – In Blair’s last election as PM he got 9,552,436 votes. Total number of votes in this election was 27,148,510. So just under 2 thirds of those who voted, didn’t vote for him.. Awkward. However, only 61.4% of the voting populace actually voted. So if I also included the none voters, this means approximately 76% of the voting population didn’t vote for Blair. A tad more awkward.

          When they brought in police commissioners in 2012, The first Cumbrian candidate won with 18,080 votes. The total electorate in 2012 was 392,285, but only 16.38% of the populace voted. So by your reckoning there is absolutely no way Rhodes could become a police commissioner as 83.72% didn’t vote for him. Even more awkward.

          Note I only use those who are eligible to vote in these examples.

          • J Bush
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:48 am | Permalink

            Correction: only 4.61% actually voted for Rhodes. Therefore 94.39% didn’t vote for him.

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

          Andy, The only way of finding out what the electorate thinks about one particular issue is to have a referendum. Any other type of vote – general, bye, local, – will always be coloured by what other policies the voters are interested in.

          You may not have noticed, but we indeed did have a referendum on whether to Leave or Remain. The electorate chose to Leave, and whichever way you try to slant it Leave got a million and a quarter more votes than Remain.

          The only way of checking that result now, is to have another duplicate referendum. But if so, you will have to explain why the 2016 Referendum is invalid where the “second” 2019 referendum is valid. You can’t. So accept the result of 2016.

          • Andy
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 9:46 am | Permalink

            He would rather be burnt at the stake than accept the 2016 Referendum result. He only accepts results of which he approves.

        • steve
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:54 pm | Permalink


          Perhaps you could answer J Bush’s question, I for one am intrigued to know.

    • Shirley
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:41 am | Permalink

      I think you will find lots of people voted Remain purely as a result of Project Fear. As the threats failed to materialise, they have reverted to Leave. Also, many Remain voters do respect democracy, unlike many in Parliament.

      The Leave vote is growing, and many no longer believe anything that politicians say. Many politicians are proven liars, or ‘manipulators of the truth’. There needs to be some sort of electoral power to recall such politicians, especially those who promise to uphold democracy (in order to get elected) and then do the opposite.

    • agricola
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:56 am | Permalink

      More delusional remain thinking. From what line of logic and electoral voting arose the Brexit Party to become our largest representation in the EU parliament. It did not happen on the ebb of a Brexit tide. Looks more like a spring tide to me with sun, moon, and barometric pressure all acting in alignment.

    • Timaction
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:21 am | Permalink

      Remoaners don’t get democracy. You lost. We won our freedom. Now deliver. Nothing less as Tory’s have lost all trust. Too many Duncan’s, Clarkes, Souberry, Grieve and on and on and on Gauke, Liddington. Never trust a Tory!

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:00 pm | Permalink

        Present company excepted.

        • John Hatfield
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:14 pm | Permalink

          But add Philip Hammond to the list of untrustworthies.

    • Mary Paddock
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 8:10 am | Permalink

      Rubbish .. LONDON wants to stay in the corrupt and unaudited EU … The rest of us want OUT !!

  2. Penpusher
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 5:51 am | Permalink

    Quite untrue to conclude by claiming that we did not vote to sign a Future Partnership Treaty – we absolutely did! David Davis, prominent Brexiter, assured us that we would retain the exact same benefits after leaving – that can be done only by signing a Future partnership treaty. Dan Hannan and Owen Paterson promised we would stay in the single market – that needs a Future partnership treaty. Michael Gove similarly guaranteed unchanged free trade – that needs a future partnership treaty. The official LEAVE leaflet said no Art 50 notice would be sent until a deal was cleared with the EU. It’s hard enough for us to deliver Brexit without politicians like you misrepresenting what people voted for in 2016. Please stop

    • David Price
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:34 am | Permalink

      Please point out in the “official” leave brochure where it says article 50 wouldn’t be signed before a deal was agreed. All it actually says is;

      “We negotiate a new UK-EU deal based on free trade and friendly cooperation. We end the supremacy of EU law. We regain control. We stop sending £350 million every week to Brussels and instead spend it on our priorities, like the NHS and science research. We regain our seats on international institutions like the World Trade Organisation so we are a more influential force for free trade and international cooperation.”

      The Prime Minister of the day stated;
      “If the British people vote to leave, there is only one way to bring that about, namely to trigger article 50 of the treaties and begin the process of exit, and the British people would rightly expect that to start straight away.

      • Kathy
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:06 pm | Permalink

        Thank you for placing this on here.

        I am so fed up with what we call Eurotrolls, who come on websites and disparage Brexit and want to start the debate on whether we should leave the EU again.

        They usually resort to personal insults as some have here.

    • agricola
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:39 am | Permalink

      An apt title. We voted to regain our sovereignty, in effect control of our borders, laws, and finances from what is becoming an increasingly totaliltarian disfunctional entity calling itself the EU. An FTA on goods and services is a plus to us and a greater plus to the EU. The gentlemen you cite may have expressed a desire for such an FTA, but I do not recall any of them promising it. Staying in the single market would have been contrary to leaving the EU, only remainers such as yourself wish this. Trading with the EU does not require a future partnership agreement or the WA as it is called. If it remains in the minds of some of those in the EU they are not going to get it. Yours is a fully delusional contribution.

    • mickc
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:47 am | Permalink

      The result of the Referendum was a decisive majority for leaving the EU. That’s what “people voted for”… to leave.

      • Tory in Cumbria
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:05 am | Permalink

        But mick, what does leave mean? Leave and be like Norway? leave and be like the Swiss? leave and be like Turkey? Or Canada? or Korea? Just like when you want to buy a new car you then decide what model you want, so too when you leave the EU, you choose what your future relationship will be. It isnt one size fits all. So, what model of leave do you really want? We had a million different stories from leavers in 2016, and we are still getting them now – except the one model of leave that no one suggested in 2016, leave with no deal, is now the one being shoved down our throats

        • Caterpillar
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:14 am | Permalink


          These Norway, Turkey etc. so called compromise positions are specious arguments put around with political intent. Leaving and Remaining can be seen as compromises e.g. some Leavers will have voted to leave to be free of CU and regulations but happy with freedom of movement, giving up the latter to gain the former (and many such combinations). I would suggest that it is because of the compromises many Remainers were marginal remainers, and many Leavers were marginal leavers. It is for this reason that a binary referendum was the right way to make a decision and inevitably close, but it does mean everyone who voted contributed to the decision. Of course there will be clear clear cut voters as well who found the decision personally easy to make (e.g. those who have suffered immigration effects on social mobility on the one hand, or those elite who benefit from cheap labour and wish to send their children, little Yvette or little Oliver, off to Europe on the other). This is where the difficulty has lay, the HoC and HoL are stuffed with clear cut Remainers who use their power to slow things up, wearing down the marginal voter, they don’t care for the damage they do, they don’t care for the correct decision in aggregate, they care only for their view.

        • mickc
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:51 am | Permalink

          My own view was that a Canada plus deal was what was required. I expected that negotiations would be conducted to achieve that. They weren’t; negotiations were conducted to effectively keep us in the EU. That demonstrated the extreme bad faith of our elected representatives towards us, the voters.

          I no longer believe that our representatives are trying to do other than keep us in. That being the case I want us out as soon as possible, deal or not. There cannot be a proper deal by 31st October so out with no deal it is…

        • 'None of the above'.
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:00 pm | Permalink

          Dear ‘Tory in Cumbria’

          Leave means leave and BE the UK! Be like ourselves, be what WE want to be, do what WE want to do.

          • steve
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

            none of the above

            “Leave means leave and BE the UK! Be like ourselves, be what WE want to be, do what WE want to do.”

            Careful, you’ll get accused.

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

          Tory in Cumbria, Leave means leaving the EU treaties. It does not mean remaining in the EU treaties (Remain), remaining in some of the EU treaties (SM, CU, EEA), or re-joining the EU via a new treaty (WA).

          The test of whether an agreement with the EU is actually Leave is quite simple – is it an agreement we can also offer to other countries?

          Take the example of our fishing waters: we could not offer the USA control of our EEZ, so we must not offer that to the EU. Trade, yes. Rule, no. It’s not that difficult to understand.

        • Woody
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

          No, we had a million different excuses from the remain gang about why we must not leave. There was just one theme from the leave side .. we must leave as the majority who bothered to vote chose.

        • L Jones
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

          ”What does leave mean?”
          depart from, go away from, go from, withdraw from, retire from, take oneself off from, exit from, take one’s leave of, pull out of, quit, be gone from, decamp from, disappear from, abandon, vacate, absent oneself from, evacuate; say one’s farewells/goodbyes, make off, clear out, make oneself scarce, check out; abscond from, run away from, flee (from), fly from, bolt from, escape (from); sling one’s hook….

          Does that make it clearer? It certainly doesn’t mean ”leave but only if we can emulate some other country’s position with regard to the EU”.

        • agricola
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

          When you choose a car it is between you and the car company. You can even choose which company. The only limiting factor is how much you are able to spend.

          Once the electoral choice is to leave the EU there are numerous factors that influence exactly how you leave, your preferred choice, the input of the EU, and then taking all the factors into account, how you actually achieve it. Put a simplistic way, on deciding to play a cricket match in June 2016, scheduled for March 2019, you cannot anticipate the weather on the day of play. So it is no surprise that we end up with a form of leave that does not suit everyone, least of all those who voted to remain and hope they can put the clock back. Get used to it, we are leaving come what may.

          • Kevin Lohse
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:18 am | Permalink

            You may not be able to anticipate the weather, but you can do your utmost to queer the pitch and get the fixture rained off. As Remainers have done.

        • John Hatfield
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

          You are making it up.
          “We had a million different stories from leavers in 2016,”
          From whom? I never heard about any so-called ‘deals’ except from remainers.
          I voted for what was on the ballot sheet – to leave.

        • Al
          Posted July 15, 2019 at 7:44 am | Permalink

          The real question is what does Remain mean? I’ve heard a million different versions, from Remaining meaning staying at our current level of integration, to joining to Euro, to “ever closer union”. I’ve even heard a Remainer refer to the Norway option as Remaining, and I’m not sure how that works.

          At the time of the referendum we were told “no unified EU army” by Remain. That was blatantly untrue. We were told that if we Remained we would not have to integrate further. Also untrue.

          Please define one Remain option, in terms of future integration and governance, and we can decide if we want that.

        • Andy
          Posted July 15, 2019 at 9:50 am | Permalink

          But TiC what does ‘Remain’ mean ??? You got to tell us. Does it mean remain in the EEC or does it mean Remain in a ‘United States of Europe’ ? Does it mean that everything has to remain set in stone as it was in 2016 or do you imagine the EU will change and develop ?? And if so how far does the change and development go and does the 2016 Referendum give you the authority needed to permit any change and development ? We need to know.

    • Original Richard
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:53 am | Permalink

      Whilst leavers fully understood how we were being fleeced by the EU (our taxpayers funding corporates moving their factories out of the UK, funding infrastructure projects in other EU countries, funding jobs for Eurozone people thrown out of work by the Euro – a currency dreamt up without a sketch of a plan, the loss of our fishing grounds and a SM/CU designed so we have a trading deficit of £100bn/YEAR), they did not foresee how nasty Mrs. May and the EU would become when it came to negotiating a Withdrawal Treaty which was so bad that Mr. Verhosdtadt’s staff descibed it as reducing the UK to the status of a colony.

      As a result Mrs. May/the EU have left us with no other option to respect the rsult of the referendum and 2017 GE – and show the world that we are still a democracy – other than to leave with “no deal” on WTO terms.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

        I for one will not miss Theresa May. Her coronation was a travesty and I hold every MP who voted for her accountable for that gross error, especially when eminently well-qualified leavers were plentiful. With her departure, I breathe a big sigh of relief with the words, ‘Thank Christ for that!’ I don’t smoke, but I may well light a big cigar in celebration!

        You don’t put a weak dithering hopeless remainer in charge of something so crucial as the UK leaving the EU where only a committed leaver would suffice. Someone who would not bow or bend the knee in the face of a dangerous creeping undemocratic totalitarian state in the making. We are heartily sick of those who sell this country down the river rather than build on its strengths and make it the fantastic dynamic place it should have been all along.

        May already had form. She was a failure at the Home Office – ask any policeman or prison officer, or victim of crime who had been left high and dry through insufficient numbers of respondents – and that should have given her supporters a fair indication what she was actually like, just another liberal pro-EU do-gooder in Tory clothes who was always going to fail and give in. And that is being charitable for in all probability, she privately planned to cheat us all along. Let’s hope we can now dispense with the services of such duplicitous people and get back to the really strong and decisive leadership we once had before the likes of Major took office.

        We have been an international joke for far too long. I am backing Boris for leader because only he can give this country the lift from the gloom of the past decade that it so desperately needs. We can, with the right people in positions in government, believe in ourselves once again and UK PLC will be something to take pride in.

        Were Boris to fail, I am sure Nigel Farage will step into the breach and take a lot of disaffected voters from other parties with him.

        • Tad Davison
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

          1st paragraph: ‘Chose’ not ‘voted for’. That’ll teach me not to write posts and watch the cricket at the same time.

    • Alan Jutson
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:58 am | Permalink

      When the EU refuse to talk about a future trade deal until you are out, then what do you do, obey them !
      I guess you would give up would you, just like May.
      Then offer all sorts of goodies as requested.
      You should remember they are not our masters, unless of course we allow them to be, and its clear from your comments that is how you think.

      Good grief no wonder our government was so useless and clueless if it is filled with people who have thoughts like you.

      Have you ever worked in a truly competitive business environment where you have to bid for contracts, or sell products and services, or was it simply too tough and nasty for you.

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

        The attitude of ‘Penpusher’ exemplifies that of remoaners. To quote from Robert Tombs’ article in the Telegraph today – he speaks of:
        ”… the intellectual insubstantiality of the Remain arguments. So many clichés, so little thought….”
        This is why remoaners always sound like losers. They make no effort to win hearts and minds, to persuade us benighted leavers that their EU is great and glorious and the Nirvana that we should all be wishing to share. Why don’t they praise the EU instead of denigrating their own country’s ability to go it alone? No wonder they sound merely petulant as they are losing the argument.

    • J Bush
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:58 am | Permalink

      I recall them talking about a trade deal. However, I don’t recall the word ‘treaty’ being used.

      A trade deal does not require a treaty. The US for example doesn’t have a treaty with Germany. That is why US can tell Germany if it wants to continue exporting to the US, the inequable tariffs, which favour only Germany, must end. Germany has strongly objected to this, but they have never referred to a treaty article stating the inequality can continue.

      • Andy
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:39 am | Permalink

        Treaty was used by Vote Leave in its manifesto. ‘What does leaving look like’. You can still read it online.

        Staggering – it mentions a deal but not no deal. Who’d have thought?

        • Fred H
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:38 am | Permalink

          Andy …true.
          Who’d have thought the EU and the ex-PM would stitch us up so tightly, that a deal was not possible? They wrote the script, she picked her Remain team, the other ones with judgement and honesty resigned. Here we are 2 to 3 years later STILL condemned to sit out the final chapter of the shambles.

          • Tad Davison
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:55 pm | Permalink

            True Fred, and the last thing we need now is continuity May.

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

          Andy, A treaty for a trade deal is quite different to a treaty where the UK exchanges trade for being ruled by the EU. Trade for trade; not trade for control by the EU. And before you squawk that we’re not ruled by the EU, remember Declaration 17.

    • Simeon
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:06 am | Permalink

      The referendum was utterly misconceived, stupidly designed, and then fought by politicians who, almost without exception, we’re, and in most cases still are, unable to think coherently about the reality of our country’s relationship with the EU, and with third countries, or even about the relationships that exist between groups and individuals in the UK itself. You then have these same politicians tasked with delivering the referendum result. That chaos has ensued was inevitable.

      The present mess is more than four decades in the making,
      during which time this country’s governments have repeatedly, and probably deliberately, failed to be honest about our relationship with Europe (it has not necessarily been a conspiracy to shackle the UK to the EU; never underestimate the ability of politicians to cock up). Into this context, the referendum was inserted, and huge numbers of people voted in such a way as to express their dissatisfaction with the present arrangements. Knowing the hearts and minds of voters is not possible on the basis of a referendum; it’s impossible to know what voter’s thinking was when they voted to Leave. But nevertheless, the sentiment was clear; radical change, though disruptive, was necessary. The details of how to deliver this change are for the political class to grapple with (though of course their inability – or unwillingness – to do so is a huge problem).

      What was obvious was that the UK must either remain in the EU or leave it completely, and this because to do otherwise would fatally undermine the EU project. Furthermore, the integrity of the EU project demands that our trading relationship with them must change. This is unavoidable, but not broadly undesirable, even if there will be losers as well as winners, as happens whenever there is economic change.

      Voters may not have known the precise details of what they were voting for, but they knew in broad terms. Events subsequent to the referendum serve to demonstrate that proposal and delivery of policy must not be separated. The only way out of the current shambles is a GE, in which parties submit clear manifestos to deal with reality. Our democracy then expects that the ‘winning’ manifesto is implemented.

      • Simeon
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:13 am | Permalink

        I should clarify that I’m not suggesting the UK should respect, accept and submit to EU policy/ideology. Rather, we must understand that this is their position, and be unsurprised by their adherence to it, even when there is an economic cost. Inevitably, we must share in this cost; that is the price of more than four decades of relationship.

    • Dominic
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:07 am | Permalink

      We voted to Leave the EU. We voted to take back our sovereignty and our independence. It’s extremely simple to understand.

      • Andy
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:47 am | Permalink

        Yes but – as I have said before – there are different ways to leave.

        You can leave nicely, as friends.

        Or you can make a scene, storm out and slam the door.

        Or you can jump out of the window.

        All are leaving. But all are not the same. Which did you vote for?

        More importantly what did you vote for to come next – because you do understand that there has to be a next, right?

        Did you vote for a Norway type arrangement – which would actually solve many of the problems with your Brexit and which most Remainers could live with to. (Nigel Farage also once wanted it).

        Did you vote for a Canada type deal? Actually you didn’t because Canada and the EU did not have a deal on referendum day. But if that’s the sort of thing you now want – then you need to decide where to put the border.

        Did you vote for a North Korea type deal – where you basically live in splendid isolation and the regime kills people.

        Did you vote for something else – in which case what was it and how will it work?

        None of this is hard to understand either – and yet you are struggling.

        Just tell us how you want to leave and what you want to come next. That is all Brexiteers have ever had to do – why won’t you?

        • agricola
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:02 am | Permalink

          The referendum was Leave or Remain, not type of leave or type of remain. Only the likes of you wish to confuse matters by creating numerous options and then fantasising that they were part of the original question on the ballot paper.

          If all leavers were in their dottage as you often imply, but hardly born out by the figures, remember this, we have been there from the begining and have a lifetime of experience on which to base our judgement. Most of us have achieved more in our lives than you could possibly aspire to. We are still sufficiently mentally astute to see through most of the nonsense you write, so try consigning us to the dustbin of life at your peril.

        • Timaction
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:27 am | Permalink

          Dear Dear, temper tantrums. We’ve had these arguments for 3 years. You lost. Get over it. No deal but managed exit is just fine. If they want tariffs on goods that’s fine. I’m sure we could use the extra money on our roads, health, education and border control!

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:37 pm | Permalink

          Andy, A Norway type deal is not Leave because we end up still being governed by the EU – not as much as now, but the EU would still be in control of our trade. Gove et al were quite clear that we were to leave the EU’s single market, and regain control of our trade policy (so no customs union either).

          The rule is very simple, so that even Remains like you can understand it: if the EU retains control of the UK in any way, it’s not Leave.

        • Ian terry
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:07 pm | Permalink


          More importantly what did you vote for to come next – because you do understand that there has to be a next, right?

          The one thing the majority voted for was to leave and get as far away from within the planned Federal State of Europe which has always been on the EU agenda.

          So the next, for the remainers is quite simple. By staying in, this country will end up as being a federal state, governed and answerable to the self appointing hierarchy. Will will lose everything that this country has ever excelled at. When they shout jump,all we can do is ask how high. Ann Widdecombe was not to far away from the truth of how the future is beginning to pan out for the EU with her speech.

          • L Jones
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

            I wonder if Andy does actually reply to these difficult questions, Mr Terry, or if perhaps Sir John moderates his/her replies.

            I’m sure we’d all be interested to hear if he/she can actually string together a justification in reply to all these criticisms of his/her much-revered EU, rather than only indulge in insult, ageism, obfuscations and pointless, ill-informed jibes.

        • steve
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:04 pm | Permalink


          “Yes but – as I have said before”

          Yes but, no but, ah but…….lost the referendum not fair.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:59 pm | Permalink

        Simple for most people, maybe, but Andy is even more simple so doesn’t get it.

    • Stred
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:11 am | Permalink

      More lies from the Remainer civil masters. We did not vote to sign anything. We were told that we would have access to the single market, like other countries, but would have to leave the customs union. We were told that we would negotiate s deal which would be in the interest of the EU. The EU has insisted on only negotiating after we leave. May accepted this against the advice of Davis. The leaflet said nothing about A50. We thought we would leave straight away because the then PM told us that he would issue A50 “the following day. Your nest of vipers has been working against the democratic vote since your lies during the campaign failed. Boris needs to demote those who are guilty.

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

        Stred, Even assuming “Penpusher” really does work in the civil service, there is something one dimensional about him/her. My own contact in the civil service is a lot more nuanced and evidence based than Penpusher and, unlike him, would not so blatantly push Remain propaganda. I suspect Penpusher is not very well educated judging by his writing style, and is not at the political level.

      • bill brown
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:28 pm | Permalink


        Boris needs to demote himself and his party

        • steve
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

          bill brown

          Personally I think Boris should just quit the conservatives and get as far away as possible. It’s a dead party.

          Apart from Boris I don’t know of one single conservative MP nowadays who isn’t a hypocrite. He’d be best off out of it.

    • Brian Tomkinson
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      Why don’t you take your own advice and stop misrepresenting our host. He wrote: “We voted to leave, not to stay in for another 21 to 45 months three years on, and certainly not to sign a Future Partnership Treaty which might well be much like staying in without voice or vote.”
      You told us previously thay you are a civil servant and it seems clearly that you are an ardent Remainer.

      • Penpusher
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:16 am | Permalink

        Yes Brian, I have no doubt our country is better off staying in the EU. But no civil servant allows their politics to affect how they do their job. Like all civil servants, I follow instructions. If, at some stage, the Brexiters could tell me how to leave the EU while fulfilling all the promises made – to get a great deal from the EU, shiny deals with the rest of the world, money for the NHS, tax cuts, etc – then I shall go and execute the plan. I am waiting. So are all my colleagues.

        • Jiminyjim
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:20 pm | Permalink

          ‘No civil servant allows their politics to affect how they do their job’. I worry about our civil service when statements like this, which cannot by definition be proved, are tossed out as if they are facts. Your own comments on this site, Penpusher, show there is at least one exception!

        • J Bush
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

          Until recently I worked in the civil service and the rosy picture you paint, does not reflect what I witnessed. Though I do accept the civil service is stuffed full to the rafters with those who never question the bureaucratic overload, or the logic of the policy direction. Even when it conflicts with the country leaving the EU, becoming sovereign and more self sufficient. Very few questioned what was being implemented as they ‘don’t want to make waves as I like my current position’. Who can be the best ‘sjw brown nose’ to get promotion springs to mind.

          Gove is also beavering away in the background trying to claim the need to grow more trees and prime farmland must be at least minimum 5% PG01 for eco reasons. But funnily enough his policy also works to ensure this country not only can’t be more self sufficient, but also increasingly reliable on mainland european farmers for our food.

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:55 pm | Permalink

          Penpusher, There were no “promises” from either Leave or Remain, because neither were parties about to be elected into government. It was a campaign of advocacy and argument for either Leave or Remain. No more. And no less.

          You say: “no civil servant allows their politics to affect how they do their job”. Your false statements here demonstrate that is untrue, at least in your case. Using JR’s phrase: we don’t believe you.

          It is true some Leaves advocated getting “a great deal from the EU”. I did not. Neither did Gerard Batten. And many others. But in any case Leave was not predicated on obtaining such a deal. You cannot point out any such condition, either on the ballot paper or in the EU Referendum Act 2015. So much for your impartiality.

        • Tad Davison
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

          Two football teams set out to play a vital game. They are bitter opponents. One side can choose from a squad of 16 players. The other only has 10 – one player short. The side with the bigger squad offers to loan them one of their own players.

          The match is so important, whoever wins will gain the ascendency for generations to come. Should the side with only 10 players accept the offer of a loanee from the opposition and trust him to be absolutely impartial?

          I think not! I would rather get a bloke off the street than accept an very iffy offer of a potential 5th columnist.

          That was a hypothetical example. Here’s a real one:

          We had a reamainer Prime Minister who endlessly dished out all sorts of platitudes like ‘We will be leaving the EU on March 29th’ and ‘Brexit means Brexit’. Look how that turned out, and you would have us meekly trust a remain civil service to work towards a conclusion Brexiteers would be happy with?

          Does the name Olly Robbins ring any bells?

          I think you need to be acquainted with how the real world works.

        • stred
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

          Leave on WTO and tell them they can have a free trade deal as quickly as they wish and a temporary arrangement immediately. If they don’t, we trade with 10% on finished cars and larger tariffs on food. Use existing cameras and prepare forms. Just like JR and others who want to leave have been saying and writing for the last 3 years. Have you finally got it?

    • jane4brexit
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:13 am | Permalink

      I watched the last PMQs before the election on 15th June 2016 and Q14, asked by Nigel Evans MP, asked on behalf of both houses whether the decision of the British people would be honoured and no further referendum held.

      The PM at that time answered that it would, he also stated that we would leave in about 2 years and only “then” once we had left would negotiations for a trade deal begin. He was definite about this and specifically asked all MPs to take note of this before voting themselves in the referendum:

      “I am very happy to agree with my hon. Friend. “In” means we remain in a reformed EU; “out” means we come out. As the leave campaigners and others have said, “out” means out of the EU, out of the European single market, out of the Council of Ministers—out of all those things—and will then mean a process of delivering on it, which will take at least two years, and then delivering a trade deal, which could take as many as seven years. To anyone still in doubt—there are even Members in the House still thinking about how to vote—I would say: if you have not made up your mind yet, if you are still uncertain, just think about that decade…”

      This was a programme logical to watch prior to voting and another was Cameron’s Sky Q&A programme with a studio audience and interview, in this he was even more specific mentioning that Leave meant WTO at 1.2 minutes into this video of excerpts “David Cameron !!28 TIMES!! “Leave Single Market” (June 2016)”:

      • Mayo
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:22 am | Permalink

        But Mr Cameron supported Remain, and Remain lost. So it is totally irrelevant what Mr Cameron said Leave would mean. It is what Leave said Leave would mean that counts, because Leave won. And a whole string of Leavers – Gove, Johnson, Paterson, Hannan etc – said clearly we would stay in the single market. Only a madman would want to leave it, as Owen Paterson put it

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:02 pm | Permalink

          Mayo, No they said we would leave the single market – for example, Marr’s interview of Gove before the vote, and many others. What they said is we would retain access to the single market. The reason why what Cameron said was important at the time was that he was the Prime Minister of the government that had called the Referendum.

          • stred
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

            Nick. It’s a zombie mistake. No matter how many times people knock it down by explaining ACCESS it gets up and keeps on coming.

      • jane4brexit
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 8:09 am | Permalink

        The links are not included but both are easy to find if you ‘search’ the titles mentioned and are both worth a watch. Programmes such as the Sky one were specifically made to inform voters before the referendum and the PMQs answer quoted was too, which Cameron makes clear in his response “To anyone still in doubt…”.

        I had quoted this answer as being the answer of our PM at the time, not as Cameron in a personal capacity and as NickC has already explained…Cameron was answering and setting out what a vote to Leave meant as PM which is why it is important and as the title of the programme PMQs as makes clear.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

      Penpusher, That confirms you have succumbed to Remain propaganda rather than being impartial. I have watched Daniel Hannan’s interview cited by Remain, and it is quite clear from the context that Hannan did not want to remain in the EU’s single market – what he wanted was to retain access to it. That is, he thought the UK would not be excluded from the EU’s SM. Unless you think the EU is about to declare total economic war what Hannan said was reasonable.

      • Pooj
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:04 pm | Permalink

        You can only retain access to it by remainng in it. That is what accessmeans

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:46 pm | Permalink

          Pooj, Then how does the USA have access to the EU’s single market? And China? Each of which sells more than twice as much into the EU’s single market than we do.

        • Original Richard
          Posted July 15, 2019 at 1:56 am | Permalink


          All countries in the world have access to the EU’s Single Market as otherwise how do the USA, China, Japan etc. manage to export goods to the EU ?

        • Original Richard
          Posted July 15, 2019 at 2:15 am | Permalink

          Mrs. May’s only legacy will be that she was a remainer PM, elected by a largely remainer Conservative Party, who was tasked with thwarting the referendum result and the GE 2017 manifestos of the the two main parties and furthermore attempting to put through Parliament a new treaty with the EU where we accepted EU laws, budgets, taxes, fines and policies (trade, energy, environment, foreign, immigration etc) but without representation or veto and with no lawful means of exit – the one described by Mr. Verhofstadt’s staff as reducing the UK to EU colony status.

          There were even clauses to allow EU employees to evade prosecution for criminal acts committed on UK soil.

          There is only one word to describe Mrs. May and that is “traitor”.

        • Edward2
          Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:12 am | Permalink

          Well that’s not correct Pooj.
          Nations like America, China and South Korea, for example, are not in the single market nor are they in the EU, yet they trade with Europe very successfully.

  3. Mark B
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 5:56 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    So she claims she was trying to find a compromise between Leave and Remain.

    I do not remember, ‘compromise’ being one of the choices on the EU Referendum ballot paper ?

    Or to be more cynical to the above, it was more important to keep the Tory Party together rather than fulfilling their pledge to the people. So Leave had to ‘compromise’, or put it another way, roll over and allow a Soft-Remain, aka the Withdrawal Agreement / Treaty, to be passed.

    Words other than those that cannot be said here fail me.

    • James1
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:07 am | Permalink

      Deeply regrettable that Mrs May was a Remainer from the word go, but her scheduled exit shortly is something for which we can be profoundly thankful. There was never a possibility of ‘compromise’ between Leave and Remain, the positions are diametrically opposed. But then it seems that sometimes it is necessary for some people to be so highly educated (as opposed to intelligent) in order to be able to spout such nonsense. As regards the BBC, it is indeed remarkable that after three years there is still unremitting project fear and barely a word of project opportunity, a telling reminder that a thorough-going accounting with the culprits is well overdue.

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:12 am | Permalink

      As Cameron said, “an in-out referendum”. No going back. I don’t remember him saying a Leave vote would lead to compromise either.

    • PhilW
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:53 am | Permalink

      Excellent summary. The only thing I disagree with is “keeping the Party together”. May was always a remainer and if she thought she could get her appalling deal through by throwing the Party under a bus then so be it. She is signed up heart and soul to the Brussels project and I suspect her own grandmother stood in the way she too would be at risk.

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

        The only thing I disagree with are the words:
        ”… Her Brexit Secretaries were Leave…”
        Actually, our MP is the ‘Parliamentary Undersecretary of State at the Department for Exiting the European Union’ – and he most certainly is NOT ”leave” and made no bones about it, even though our constituency was for leaving the EU.

    • Pominoz
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:15 am | Permalink

      Mark B,

      Other words can be said. May is a traitor pure an simple. She was not even bright enough to realise that her blatant treachery, and that of her cohorts, would be totally obvious to all sovereign minded individuals. She has crafted her legacy. That disastrous legacy is hers for the remainder of her lifetime, and forever in history. Now, however, she must be denied the opportunity to impede Boris from delivering what the result of the referendum has clearly demanded.

      • Tad Davison
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

        Spot on! Agree with every word!

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        Well said, Pominoz. I’m sure most of us agree wholeheartedly with your words.

        (Andy – I don’t include you, of course.)

  4. Fedupsoutherner
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:01 am | Permalink

    One of your best posts to date John. No more be said except to say I agree with every word. Let’s hope Boris has the integrity to keep to his word and get us out. If not, Farage will be very busy.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

      Fedupsoutherner, Indeed I agree. I suppose one gain, of sorts, is that Theresa May is now claiming her draft Withdrawal Agreement is a “compromise” rather than the Leave she previously maintained it was. Will we have to wait 20 years before she finally admits that remaining in the EU’s SM, CU, CCP, CFP, under the CJEU, paying the EU ££loads, and joining PESCO are actually Remain and not a compromise of any sort?

  5. Mike Stallard
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:09 am | Permalink

    What I hope Boris will do is to surround himself with a smaller cabinet of like minded, positive people with a specified and determined aim – Brexit.
    His huge advantage over Mrs May is that he is positive – he inspires, he shows the future as bright. That is the mark of a real leader.
    I look forward to a nice clean Brexit and a future where people can at last show their talents freely and with some thankful appreciation.

    • Peter Wood
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      I sincerely hope you will be correct. The Question is has Boris ‘matured’ into a national leader, capable of taking the Tories by the scruff-of-neck to get Brexit done? Or will he revert to his old Billy Bunteresque incompetence.

      My hope is that the joint threat from the ERG and the Brexit Party will stiffen resolve and enforce the desired outcome.

      • Chris
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

        PW I too have concerns about Boris. He, like so many other politicians, has become lazy and unable to think properly for himself/themselves or to be bold and radical, as all the decisions have been taken by Brussels. In short, the EU has emasculated our politicians and now they have to suddenly grow a pair and think for themselves, or rather for their country. They are not used to being patriotic and having to fight for something.

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:47 pm | Permalink

        Peter Wood, Having seen Boris perform at a rally and been near him afterwards, I would say his Billy Bunter act is just that – an act, to disarm his critics particularly the Haters-not-hopers types. I saw no incompetence.

    • LukeM
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:14 am | Permalink

      Boris is Boris, I’m afraid, his modus is to bluster, bluff, use hand gesture and go off key with that boyish grin, then tuck is shirt in and pat his hair, in the hope that this may bamboozle and this might endear him to his followers, but is not going to do much for the serious matters that lie ahead. Therefore I predict a vote of no confidence in him probably before the year is out. Poor Mrs May never rose above the role of Home Secretary- Boris will always be Mayor of London.

      • Chris
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

        I find Boris’s mannerisms and general stance hugely irritating and I do not find him a convincing politician. He seems to lack the necessary grit, fire and determination and just seems to resort to his old ways, trying to charm or bluster. Not good enough. We need a worthy PM who will fight for the UK. Get rid of all those Remainers in your Cabinet, Mr Johnson, otherwise you will lack credibility. The point is, though, that BJ should not have to be told that.

        • Nickyroberts
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 5:05 pm | Permalink

          Chris so who do you suggest has the necessary grit, fire and determination? I can’t think of anyone. He is the best we have and we need to get behind him.

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

        If only Mr Johnson would let it be known that he acknowledges he should not have voted for May’s ”deal” at the third time – then we might believe in him.

        Otherwise, it makes all he says ring rather hollow. If he thought her ”surrender treaty” was a good thing, after due consideration – then we should be very suspicious. He might bring it back, slightly changed. Dreadful thought.

        I would much much rather believe in him.

  6. agricola
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:12 am | Permalink

    You have used up a lot of column inches to tell us she was a lying devious creature not worthy of the office she held. A Blairite at best in the Home Office, totally failing to take control of the none EU immigration she was free to control. Chosen as a Blairite leader to replace Cameron she then acting to thwart Leave by using remain civil servants and ministers to effect her ruse while talking leave. Sacking or forcing the resignation of anyone who sussed her real intentions, a reord total of 32 I believe. She even sank into the delusion of not accepting her guilt right to the end. Her final delusion was to think she can shape UK politics as her legacy in her absense, what deluional arrogance. She leaves behind an almost total distrust
    of MPs, a shattered conservative party, and a humiliated UK. A disgusting woman.

    • Shirley
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:45 am | Permalink

      Well said, Agricola. May should be prosecuted for deceit, fraudulent intent intended to damage the UK. The WA must be the worst deal in the whole of human history. That alone should be enough to have her removed from politics, permanently.

      • J Bush
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:44 am | Permalink

        Agreed. she shouldn’t just resign her position as PM. She has brought government into disrepute. She must leave Parliament. And I sincerely hope whoever is the next PM doesn’t elevate to the HoL. She should just leave the country and go to her beloved EU and walk away to her hearts content.

        • formula57
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:11 am | Permalink

          A peerage is a right conferred by convention claimable by retiring prime ministers, so I understand, and so not easily denied by a successor.

          Nowadays, perhaps in the face of all the personal interests disclosure required of parliamentarians, there seems a reluctance to make a claim.

          • J Bush
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:55 am | Permalink

            If I recall correctly, Blair, Brown and Cameron didn’t get a peerage. So the precedent has been set. 🙂

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

        She is an MP. Someone voted for her. Were they mad? Will they remain mad?

        There was a majority for ‘remain’ in her constituency, yes. So you could say she is representing them to the best of her ”ability”. But perhaps the demographics have changed since she has proved to be such an embarrassment to them and the country in general.

    • mickc
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:54 am | Permalink

      But regrettably she most certainly has shaped British politics, and economy, with her Green nonsense.

      Incidentally, I do not support terrorism, contrary to your assertion in the previous post, nor do I impute such to others.

    • Stred
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:59 am | Permalink

      Agreed. There needs to be an inquiry into the conduct of May and the civil service. This degree of dishonesty must not to be wiped away with honours and enoblement.

      • Shirley
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:45 am | Permalink

        An inquiry, and some heads rolling, would help restore trust in Parliament. We all know the opposite will happen, ie. places in the Lords for those who tried to destroy democracy in the UK, and then parliament will wonder why trust is still non-existent … but that will only apply to the few in parliament who do care about the UK and I suspect they are in the minority … but minorities rule these days … don’t they?

    • Peter
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:26 am | Permalink

      Agreed. A more realistic assessment.

    • Fred H
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:45 am | Permalink

      I totally agree. This woman has done so much damage to the country, the party, the outlook for the people, the esteem UK was once held in. Never an acceptance of mistakes, several worthy of resignation. Manipulation to a degree probably never managed in cabinet previously. A shocking PM and history will record the worst period of government experienced in ‘modern times’.

      • James Bertram
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:14 am | Permalink

        Thoroughly agree, Agricola.
        While May and her cohorts still remain in the Tory Party I shall not vote for them.
        They will continue to betray this country at every opportunity.
        It is time to drain the swamp.

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

        Not just the ‘outlook for the people’ but the ‘outlook OF the people’ – spreading despondency unnecessarily. She has been guilty of so much bad stuff, it’s difficult to know where to start the accusations.

        It is only because of honourable people like our host here that some of us think there might be a vestige of honour left, and even possibly, hope. But it still remains to be seen, while there are still the Andys ready to subvert and sabotage.

    • Doug Powell
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:12 am | Permalink

      Spot on Agricola! The best post I’ve seen in ages, thank you!

      The arrogance of ‘She who must be obeyed’ made her oblivious to her own incompetence – a malicious incompetence at that!
      … ‘delusion of not accepting her guilt’ – yes, she even invoked the spirit of Edith Piaff to make her point – “Non, Je ne Regrette Rien!”

      ” A disgusting woman!” That puts her legacy in a nutshell!

    • PhilW
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:55 am | Permalink

      I think you covered everything except the one question I have lingering.
      “what on earth was she doing in the Conservative Party”?

    • Chris
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:38 pm | Permalink

      Agreed, Agricola. The enormity of her wrongdoing and betrayal cannot be overstated and there should be accountability, not just a brushing under the carpet.

    • Richard Evans
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:32 pm | Permalink

      Agricola – A first class 100% correct assessment of May. She was totally incompetent and inept both as PM and Home Secretary and she was the longest serving HS!!!!!!!!!
      By the way, why did May resign? Brexit!!!!!!!!!

  7. Lifelogic
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:32 am | Permalink

    You make all the correct points but are far too generous to the appalling Theresa May. She did not just fail on Brexit she failed in so may other ways too. Almost every decision she too was wrong headed and she was totally dishonest with it. She still even now seems to think her W/A is Brexit! What part of the 9% VOTE and fifth place did she not understand?

    Her general election campaign and her “vote for us and we will kick you Conservative voters in the teeth” election manifesto was grossly incompetent, and this against the appalling magic money tree fraud Corbyn. She picked and retained the dire Philip Hammond who ran the country down with project fear, gave us the highest and most idiotic and complex taxes for 50 years. She spewed yet more endless red tape, she ruled out a points based immigration system, she wanted to build further on EU workers “rights”, she pushed through gender pay reporting (totally failing to understand the obvious reasons for the gap which have nothing to do with discrimination but free choices the genders take), she attack the letting industry. She increased taxes even further on insurance & private medical insurance, introduced absurd taxes on moving home and attacked private pension pots in a hugely damaging way. She is still, even now ratting on the £1m IHT threshold promise. Also pushing absurd, vastly expensive and totally unscientific green crap.

    She must be stopped from selecting a new US ambassador before she leaves indeed stopped from doing anything. She was an appalling and very nasty Home Secretary too.

    Just shut up & go in total ignominy woman.

    • L Jones
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:58 pm | Permalink

      Her election manifesto wasn’t ”incompetent”. We should see it now as part of her ”long game”. And we thought it might be for OUR good ! What irony. It was all for the good of her EU masters.
      How shameful she is.

  8. J Bush
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:33 am | Permalink

    In attempting to decipher her May’s intention, I think her pushing through her 0% emissions policy with no parliamentary debate and the latest idiocy of yet another quango named ‘Office of Tackling Injustices”! to add to the thousand or so others answers this. It was never a “massive well intended misjudgement”.

    By keeping her in office, she is doing what I suggested she would do. She is creating a spiteful scorched earth policy for the next PM who promised to take us lock, stock and barrel out of the EU.

    • graham1946
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:48 am | Permalink

      If there really is an ‘Office of Tackling Injustices’ perhaps their first, biggest and most important thing to investigate is the cheating of the WASPI women out of their pensions, in most cases actually stealing tens of thousands of pounds from them, as well as the anguish caused by cold hearted Tory implementation. No-one disagrees with equality, but the rush to get it done over too short a period whilst doling out billions to the EU, HS2, Overseas Aid etc. is a disgrace and stains the Tories forever.

      • J Bush
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:46 pm | Permalink

        I am one of those WASPI’s, but doubt May’s latest quango would operate that way. More likely to report, they have investigated and the government has been cleared of all blame.

        Hopefully if Johnson is elected, he will remove this and several hundred other tax guzzling useless quangos.

        • Antoinetta III
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:32 pm | Permalink

          I’m over across the pond in the US, so am ignorant of many specifics of British politics.

          So my question is: What exactly is a “quango?’

          Antoinetta III

          • BritInDeutschland
            Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:53 pm | Permalink

            Quasi non governmental organisation

          • Mark B
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 3:56 am | Permalink

            It stands for

            Quasi non governmental office.

            Essentially they privatise / outsource government work. This removes responsibility and accountability of government. It also provides a nice little earner to their friends who that appoint to head such bodies. They are not needed and are a waste of taxpayers money.

          • J Bush
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:12 am | Permalink

            QUANGO is an acronym for:

            quasi-autonomous non-governmental organisation.

            It is typically an organisation to which a government has devolved power, but which is still partly controlled and/or financed by government bodies. As its name suggests, a quango is a hybrid form of organization, with elements of both non-government organizations (NGOs) and public sector bodies.

            Tend to have lots of power, but no accountability to the electorate.

  9. GilesB
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:40 am | Permalink

    She has no principles.

    And has no understanding of people who do.

    • Mark B
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:56 pm | Permalink


  10. Bryan Harris
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    Excellent piece – Thanks JR.

    I would compare May’s departure to that of Brown and Callaghan – WE couldn’t wait to see them gone because they were making such a hash of things…. additionally, it was clearer with May, that malice was driving some last minute decisions. Let’s just be glad that most people now recognize her for what she was; someone willing to surrender everything to the EU for no gain to the UK. There are several descriptive terms for that.
    So more indoctrination from the BBC – I hope Boris is going to close them down – they are a total disgrace.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

      Bryan Harris, Callaghan was always regarded as a gentleman, out of his depth, and thankfully lacking the seedy guile of Wilson. May is quite definitely the worst of that trio. Brown is almost a hero by comparison, albeit damaged. May lacks principles – even misguided ones – and lacks honesty. She is still deluded about her dWA. Her shambles of a government has wasted 3 years. We may be relieved she is leaving but the damage she has done will last a decade even if Boris becomes PM and achieves a miracle.

      • Bryan Harris
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 6:41 am | Permalink

        Agreed NickC….. I wouldn’t be so kind to any of these 3 PM’s – The Callaghan government wasn’t just feeble – it did enormous damage to the economy and everything else, no matter how nice he was in person.
        Brown & Blair efforts are still having terrible effects on us even today and they were no gentlemen.
        As their reigns came to an end it was like a dark cloud descended on the country as we slipped into some kind of apathy. Yes, May was different, even more deceitful, but acting more openly to destroy our nation. I would still put these all in one basket for the damage they did to the UK and British people.

  11. Newmania
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:46 am | Permalink

    The deal expresses the power of the participants, it was foretold. Leave promised a cake-and-eat-it deal. Parliament (insufficiently ) reflects the majority against No Deal . New day, same mess, your fault.
    PS Mark Francois on European politics- Yeah ..good joke reminds me of my cartoon characters rugby 15, I had Speedy Gonzales and Road Runner on the wings ‘Hair Bear Bunch’ front row.. it was quiet day .(Tasmanian Devil open side flanker! )

    • Woody
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:47 am | Permalink

      I think, after reading that confused diatribe a few times, that you are of a remain persuasion .. and bitter. Leave promised that we would leave the eu as set out very clearly in the lead up to the referendum by the pro remain government. No cake and eat it, just freedom to make our own cake to our own recipe and sell it to the world .. the world outside the eu where 90% of future demand will be coming from.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:11 pm | Permalink

      Newmania, Actually it (“the power of the participants” and its consequences) was not foretold by Remain. Far from it – Remain tried to make out the EU as our friend that we should willingly allow to govern us. In our own best interests, of course. Some friend. Indeed, Remains still peddle that warm fuzzy misconception of the EU as friend rather than the enemy it has shown itself to be. UK for EU colony anyone?

    • L Jones
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:04 pm | Permalink

      Leave promised leave. Nothing more, nothing less. Don’t think we are all as naive as you are. And attempted sophistry doesn’t impress.

  12. Lifelogic
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:47 am | Permalink

    The difference in how the BBC interview people like Theresa May, Heseltine, Major, Clarke and indeed Labour people like Mc Donnall, Thornberry, Abbot, Starmer and the likes and how they attack Farage, Boris or Brexit supporter is huge. Plus the way Question Time and Any Questions have only about 20% pro Brexit panellists.

    The next government need to tackle the BBC bias, which is clearly determined to kill Brexit, push big state tax to death socialism, endless climate alarmism and destroy UK democracy further at every turn. All done with a tax on televisions so we have to pay to be told by them how they want us to “think”.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:17 pm | Permalink

      Lifelogic, Whilst I endorse your analysis of the BBC, God forbid we should “tackle BBC bias”, if by that you mean forcing the BBC to be “less” biased. It is not possible. Bias is like the air bubble under wallpaper being hung – you press it down here, and it pops up there. It is much better to accept that bias will always exist, and ensure there is a free market in it. The BBC should become pay to view. Then people can decide for themselves, pay for what they want, and not be forced to pay for what they don’t want.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:56 pm | Permalink

        Indeed that is exactly what should happen – they need to compete on a fair basis against other media providers. Rather than being a tax payer funded, left wing, pro EU, PC drivel propaganda outfit.

      • 'None of the above'.
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

        Well Said!!!!!!

      • Original Richard
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 2:36 am | Permalink

        I agree that bias will always exist but the problem with the BBC is that it is always in one direction only.

        Presenters, and one assumes the programme editors, go on and on for years and years.

        The BBC is well enough funded and large enough to be able to run different political shows with different presenters with different views.

        Newspapers/non-BBC radio stations manage to run articles/employ presenters written/hosted by people with different if not opposing views and why can this not be possible with the BBC ?

        The BBC’s views are as controlled as those in N. Korea and hence will only transmit one view on climate change or membership of the EU and will never take the side of the taxpayer on any funding issues.

  13. Kenneth
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 6:53 am | Permalink

    Many of the “experts” that appeared on the BBC came from organisations where, if you drilled into their sources of income, had a chunky slice directly or indirectly from the eu.

    Much of this was funded with our own money which was unscrupulously targeted to gain maximum leverage for Remain.

    As well as having a major propaganda operation this effort was also directed at our own civil service which was corrupted into taking the eu line.

    I suspect this barrage and pressure got to the pm who made the fatal mistake of ignoring public opinion in favour those in receipt of eu funds or favours.

    The new pm must stop funding the gravy train and drain the swamp. We must leave the eu urgently.

    • Kathy
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

      Well said!

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

      Kenneth, You are completely correct. And the way the EU is undemocratically structured naturally results in corruption, whether of Theresa May, the BBC, or our own civil service.

    • Original Richard
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 2:39 am | Permalink

      Yes, the CBI does not publish a list of its members nor as to how it is funded, although we do know that it receives money from the EU.

      So we do not know for certain that it represents BRITISH businesses at all.

  14. Alan Jutson
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:06 am | Permalink

    You cannot compromise between two opposites, unless you want to upset both.

    You can only bring the Country together AFTER you have taken a decision that was required by the majority, which was to leave.

    So bloody simple, its not complicated at all.

    Like so many politicians who live in a bubble, she does not understand human nature !

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:25 pm | Permalink

      Alan Jutson, Not just human nature, Theresa May does not understand logic either. Remaining in the EU, remaining partly in the EU, or re-joining the EU via a new treaty, none are Leave. As you say – not complicated at all.

  15. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:09 am | Permalink

    It has indeed left us looking weak and foolish as a country. Quite how we arrived at the position where this woman, who carried with her the worst possible combination of stubbornness and stupidity, was allowed to occupy her position for so long is beyond most of us. With Brown we had stubbornness and a fierce anti-English, anti-middle class pro-dependency, pro-Big Business stance. All smoke and mirrors. At least we knew where we stood. With May it was all smoke and lies.

    Really there were only two phases – before her General Election, she pretended to be fighting the Leave cause. Once that was in the bag, then the cat was let out of it, so to speak, and her true duplicity was only too evident.

    Was she stupid to assume she could get away with it? Well, with most of your party voting for her WA, including both Johnson & Hunt, perhaps in the short term she wasn’t. Who would take the blame later when things would have started to unravel? Why, Parliament of course, whilst the “gallant” Mrs May would have ridden off into the sunset.

    Happily, neither Parliament nor the people weren’t as hapless as failure May.

  16. Peter
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:12 am | Permalink

    I would have used the words ‘Good Riddance’ rather than ‘Farewell’.

    It has taken her long enough to quit and she will not be forgiven.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:27 pm | Permalink

      Peter, Short, simple, and right.

  17. John Sheridan
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    Another very good post from Sir John.

    I think we were very lucky that Mrs May went to the country in 2017 and lost a 23 point lead. If she had gained a landslide victory she would have rammed the Withdrawal Treaty through Parliament and irreparably damaged the Tory Party.

    The Party has been seriously damaged by Mrs May (and her inner circle), but there is still hope that Boris could turn it around. However, Boris needs to dump the Withdrawal Treaty, not tinker with it to ameliorate the backstop. May’ Withdrawal Treaty contains too many clauses/conditions which will limit our ability to make a success of Brexit.

    • Original Richard
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 2:45 am | Permalink

      I agree that we were lucky that Mrs. May, through her stupidity, lost her Parliamentary majority sufficient to prevent her passing through Parliament her treacherous WA treaty.

      But by “we” I mean the country and not the Conservative Party, many of whose MPs voted for the WA 3 times and thus deserve to be thrown out of Parliament at the next GE.

  18. Andy
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    This is an amusing article.

    I read that Mr Duncan Smith may be making a return to the Cabinet – in very high office, possibly Foreign Secretary – under Mr Johnson.

    The fact that IDS has had two big jobs and has failed in both of them – and that he still spouts the GATT 24 nonsense – demonstrates how unqualified he is.

    Still any opportunity to see a Brexiteer make a fool of themselves in is one to relish. So I hope the rumours are true and that we can laugh at him.

    I hear also Owen Paterson could return to Cabinet. He was useless last time too.

    Indeed you look down the list of Brexiteers and it is hard to find any that have been a success in high office. Priti Patel – should have been sacked for carrying out her own foreign policy but was allowed to resign in disgrace instead. Liam Fox resigned in disgrace from Cameron’s Cabinet. Chris Grayling? Genuinely I am sure he is useful for something but certainly not in government. His cock ups have cost us billions. Indeed someone worked out that it would be cheaper to pay Grayling £500,000 a day to stay at home than it is to slow him to go to work.

    Brexiteers outside Cabinet are no better. Steve Baker was forced to apologies for slandering all civil servants. This is now a theme of Brexiteers. Don’t like the message, yell at the messenger.

    Then there are the Brexiteer Parliamentary nutters. Mark Francois – genuinely, why does such a comical figure exist? Bone, Bridget, Dorries, Rosindell, Davies (the Welsh one), David’s (the Yorkshire one), Caulfield, Drax, Chope. Esther ‘I will create an invisible border’ McVey. Genuinely guys, do you not look at this bunch of clowns and misfits and weep. They are Brexit – and they are the most inept bunch imaginable. No wonder it has been such a car crash.

    • Woody
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:57 am | Permalink

      Come on lets compromise and look at the remain driven politicians to find if they made greater inputs to governments achievements. We fail at the first test, as I can’t think of any government achievements under May. Hammond as chancellor, a ghoul with not a positive thought in his brain .. a “realist” i.e doom merchant, throughout his tenure. Hunt .. the NHS oh dear. You could argue Gove has made some in roads ..but he wont count for you as he is of a leave persuasion. The May experience has been a car crash .. thanks to a lightweight leader who has no vision and an establishment who got hold of her ear and yanked it their way.

    • Dominic
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:02 am | Permalink

      Andy is Theresa May.

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:31 pm | Permalink

        Dominic, And you demand your £5. And rightly so!

      • Mitchel
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 10:36 am | Permalink

        Andy makes us laugh with his rare wit;I don’t recall TM ever having that effect on anyone.

    • stred
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:20 am | Permalink

      In Europe, if a translator is needed when dealing with government or health, the user pays. We should do the same. The bill to the taxpayer for translation of documents and when form filling or having medical treatment is ridiculous. If we are to get some competent Brexiteer ministers, this may happen.

    • Tory in Cumbria
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:08 am | Permalink

      Andy, it horrifies me that the decent sensible cautious Tory party of Douglas Hurd, Willie Whitelaw, Gillian Shepherd, Norman Fowler and John Major has come to this

      • Fedupsoutherner
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:54 pm | Permalink

        Tory, John Major? You have to be joking. Stop trying to keep up with Andy, MH and the lines of Newmania for best comic. John Major did such a lot of damage to this country. I should know. My family and I lost everything and I can assure you it wasn’t down to sitting on our backsides and doing nothing.

    • margaret howard
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:54 am | Permalink

      Thank you Andy for your brilliant assessment.

      Gold among the dross.

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 4:30 pm | Permalink

        Margaret Howard, So slagging off people he doesn’t know, and for which he provides no evidence is Andy’s gold standard? More like iron pyrite, or Fool’s gold in reality.

    • bill brown
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:31 pm | Permalink


      I agree with you on I D S and Owen Paterson, can we please include Boris as foreign secretary

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

      Andy, And yet you want to be governed by Von der Leyen, Lagarde, Michel (who he?), and Fontelles (double who he?). Ohhh, hahahahaha . . . .

      • Pooj
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

        No they govern no one, they are facilitators

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:53 pm | Permalink

          Pooj, The Lisbon treaty Declaration 17 states that EU law has primacy over UK law. So they do govern us. Until we Leave of course.

          • bill brown
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 9:34 am | Permalink


            Wrong again , they are facilitators and better informed then or lot on Europe

          • Edward2
            Posted July 15, 2019 at 3:21 pm | Permalink

            So they dont rule over us they “facilitate”over us.
            Interesting use of words there.

    • L Jones
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:31 pm | Permalink

      The more you froth and foam, Andy, the more obvious it is that you think a real Brexit is about to be realised. You make a fool of yourself.

      Remember: it is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt…..

      Now – think about it. What do you keep doing?

    • David Maples
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      Hey Andy, So you think leaver pols are useless? Well maybe many are, but then again, so are remainer pols eg May and Hammond. Tell me, why do you want to remain in EUland? I’ll wager £5.00 your reasons have nothing to do with economics or trade, prosperity, prices, living standards or employment levels. I reckon it’s all cultural with you. You probably think Brussels will
      guarantee all those silly liberal rights, entitlements and equalities that young people value so highly. And I bet you think Parliament will be taken over by right wingers who will undo everything. Am I right? Also, I wonder how you will react one day when you see the British Parliament reduced to the status of a EUnuch! Don’t you want to live in a country that rules itself, or are you happy to be bossed around by a bunch of French and Germans? Britain will be reduced to the status of a county council when Europe turns into one national state. How do you feel about that young fella?

  19. Alex
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:17 am | Permalink

    So the best we can say of May is that she was grossly incompetent. The only other choice is that she was actively working against the democratic wishes and best interests of the British people. Fool or traitor. In a long line of appalling prime ministers she is vying with Major for most incompetent and Blair for most criminal. I wonder if she’ll get big payoffs like Blair.

    • Pete S
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:13 am | Permalink

      There are just so many misdemeanours that someone commits when being that foolish becomes an impossibility and treacherous is the only possibility. The silence of the tory MPs was deafening. Once May had given the negotiating schedule to the EU, then the game was up at that point. Art 50 is quite loose, but May gave the EU the right to dictate EVERYTHING. This was confirmed by Verhofstatdt’s team; ‘they (the UK) have accepted all our terms and conditions.

      The metaphorical knives should have been out against May. The debacle that has followed is completely down to tory MPs.

      • Mark B
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:04 pm | Permalink


    • James Bertram
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:22 am | Permalink

      Traitor, in my book, Alex.

    • Fred H
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:44 am | Permalink

      When sent to Coventry in the H of C she’ll join the speech circuit and make millions.
      ‘How I made fools of the Civil Servants and MPs. ‘ Any takers?

  20. James
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:29 am | Permalink

    Now is the time to tidy up- the whole thing was a disaster from the start because the vote was based on the premise that there would be a different result- but Cameron & Co did not reckon for the ‘perfect storm’ gathering. Lies were told- painted on the side of a bus, advertisements showed 80 million Turks streaming this way and so it went. Then the negotiations were handled very badly from day one when DD arrived over to Brussels completely unprepared, thought he was going to bluff and bluster his way through to a new equal partnerships FTA deal with them. IDS said the german car workers would come on side. None of this has happened, Mrs May is now about to depart the scene, the German Chancellor Ms Merkel is in not too good health and we are about to be faced with a whole new set of people, Boris in London and Ms Von der Leyon in Brussels. The only thing that is constant is the WA sitting on the table and that is not going to go away- as Boris will soon find out. So all of you backroom boys and bit players now is the time to tidy up- get the shredder out.

  21. George Brooks
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:53 am | Permalink

    This time 3 years ago those MPs in the ‘Westminster Bubble’ were incredulous and could not believe the result of the Referendum. They were equally ‘gob-smacked’ with Cameron’s sudden departure so Theresa May with a reputation of being ”a b—-y difficult woman” and being a Remainer was allowed to slip into No10.

    I believe the train of thought at the time was to allow a period of procrastination and then gradually the support to Leave would evaporate similar to Holland and Denmark who had tried to change their membership of the EU. The law suits having failed, Article 50 triggered and the Brexit team under David Davis progressing better than expected, coupled with a complete ”Horlicks” of a general election, drastic steps had to be taken.

    The hard liners were moved into position, as you described Sir John, and enormous pressure applied in endeavour to get the WA passed and thank heaven it failed

    Contrary to Henry Carter’s comment very many Remainers have realised that the desire to extricate ourselves from the EU is stronger than ever and all that is being achieved is damage to our economy and international reputation. This was underlined in the European election results with both Labour and Tory dropping to historic lows.

    Our last day of EU membership MUST be 31st October 2019

    • Mayo
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      Remainers believe Brexiters have only vague slogans and empty claims, with no grasp of detail and no hint of a concrete plan. I’d say you just proved it, George!

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

        Mayo, So tell me, why do you think we should be ruled by the EU? And why do you think the UK cannot be as independent as New Zealand?

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      George Brooks, An accurate summary of the last 3 years. Well said.

  22. formula57
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:55 am | Permalink

    T. May seems to have no conception of why she is despised and reviled and that her attempts to roll her reputation in glitter (as her putative successor might say) are futile.

    There have been spectacular failures in the office of prime minister before of course but none adopted her quisling antics and had such a corrosive effect upon the body politic. Thank goodness a stop has been put at last.

  23. piglet
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:08 am | Permalink

    It’s a shame Trollope, with his insight into the characters of both parliamentarians and “Church people”, isn’t still with us. It would have been fun to compare his assessment of May with yours, John. Some monstrous amalgam of Mrs Proudie and Mr Slope perhaps?

    • L Jones
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:34 pm | Permalink

      A ”monstrous amalgam”. Brilliant! I’m sure that we could think of other pairings that might fit the bill!

  24. Jiminyjim
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    An excellent summary, Sir John, of an utterly miserable PM’s time in office. Two additional points need to be added. Firstly, when it became obvious that she was completely incapable of making a single decision correctly in the national interest and was also causing huge damage to Cabinet government, she should have been removed, at least a year ago.
    The second point is that if the Conservative party doesn’t learn the obvious lessons from their failure to remove her, they will cease to exist. Your party has only one more chance.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:48 pm | Permalink

      Jiminyjim, Yes that is interesting – why wasn’t she removed earlier? I half expected it after the dreadful 2017 election campaign and the loss of her majority. Certainly she should have been removed after the “Kit-Kat” tapes scandal and then at the least after Chequers. But no, Tory MPs clung on to her for dear life, as she clung on to the EU. Disgraceful.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

        200 total idiots voted that they still had confidence in her, this long beyond it was very clear what an appalling mess she was making of everything.

  25. stred
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:27 am | Permalink

    I don’t know why Boris takes all the accusations of incompetence over what he said about the Iranian lady, who is held along with many others. The video record does not show that he said she was teaching while on her visit. He only said what had been reported in the Guardian months before and her employer, the BBC should have warned staff not to go to Iran. But now we have the BBC and Guardian accusing him of causing her imprisonment for saying what is true, that she had a minor teaching job and was not a spy.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

      Indeed. The blame does not lie with Boris at all.

  26. Mark
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    It is a shame that there was no patient forensic interviewer to explore the history of her policy decisions, including why she acquiesced to Hammond over not preparing visibly for a no deal outcome from the outset, which would have strengthened her hand; why she decided to bypass DExEU and let the EU write their own agreement; whether she had agreed with the EU a plan aimed at overturning the referendum result (since Tusk openly was pushing for Revoke after Parliament rejected the WA).

    Of course she probably would not have revealed the truth, but at least she might have been made to squirm.

  27. Everhopeful
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:09 am | Permalink

    Not sure why Remoaners get sooooo hot under the collar about all this.
    It’s only trade innit?

  28. cornishstu
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:21 am | Permalink

    If she had honoured the referendum, stuck to her no deal is better than a bad deal and taken us out on or before the two-year deadline she could have quite probably have made a second term in office, instead she will leave as one of our worst PM’s ever.

  29. Prigger
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:27 am | Permalink

    I used to be interested in politics.
    Now I just listen to the needs to try harder clever words. Apart from JR and a few others, politicians make children’s education impossible.
    ‘What do we mean by British?’ What do we mean by fire?
    ‘What do we mean by leave the building it’s on fire? What do we mean by leave?
    ‘ What do we mean by fire? Is it soft fire or hard fire?
    No joke! This assault and battery on our language goes across the board and now makes for bored citizenship. Bored children. Bored teachers where words are meaningless, sentences can mean just what you wish them to mean and everyone who does not understand what you mean is a Hate-speaker or just needs to learn the facts about what a word means. Taught by Remainers with split minds.

    • Dominic
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:58 am | Permalink

      The British state’s dismantled our moral world, our moral universe (the private space) and replaced it with a political construct that now allows and affords them control over our language, our thoughts and our actions as free human beings

      It is utterly disgusting and all main parties are directly responsible for this appalling destruction dating back to around 1995 following MT’s political assassination

      Now, decent, moral people are fighting back against this state sponsored attack on our very world and our very being

      Why do Tory MPs allow this to happen?

      Why do Tory MPs remain silent on the promotion of pro-Labour, pro-EU high court judges? This politicisation is exercised right in front of our very eyes and not one single Tory MP confronts it.

      Why do Tory MPs remain silent on the BBC’s promotion of Marxism and Communism?

      I don’t understand. What are you fearful of?

      Either confront the EU-Labour-Wet Tory destruction of impartiality throughout our public institutions are step aside and allow a party to fight back against this infection

    • Caterpillar
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:06 am | Permalink

      +1 (to be interpreted relatively and subjectively)

      When diversity is no longer measured in terms of representative individual identities then UK may have escaped the failings of post-modernism, at the moment we are trapped.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

      Prigger said: “What do we mean by leave the building, it’s on fire?” You are right, that encapsulates the Remain worldview.

  30. Everhopeful
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:30 am | Permalink

    The WA was presented at Chequers year ago I think.
    Mrs M had already thrown away her majority.
    WA was prob not expected to get through…but if it had ( by any chance) been passed it would have secured us very nicely to the EU forever. So win win for a Remain govt.
    And best of all she could throw her hands up in the air and blamed her lack of majority and the “recalcitrant” leave MPs…who obviously saw it for what it was.
    Many lessons learned watching parish councils I guarantee!
    The Irish political system was brought to its knees by similar EU voting shenanigans.
    Pro EU politicians don’t care…the EU trumps all for them.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:06 pm | Permalink

      Everhopeful Indeed so.

      “Chequers” was (became the name for) an – up to then secret – White Paper produced by May’s No.10 Unit in competition to the DExEU WP. May trashed the DExEU WP, keeping her own, the one she’d already given to the EU in advance of her own Cabinet meeting at Chequers on 6th July 2018.

      We know this because the EU responded internally to May’s “Chequers” WP on 5th July 2018. So she also must have lied to her own Ministers about this prior to 6th July. The Chequers WP was instrumental in informing her draft Withdrawal Agreement. Consequently we know that May acted deliberately, it was not merely incompetence.

  31. Lynn Atkinson
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:42 am | Permalink

    I came to the conclusion decades ago that it did not matter whether people were just stupid or evil, we can not afford either in our government. It’s God’s decision not mine, but it’s my job to keep both from the Westminster Parliament.
    Pleased you confirm me in my decision.
    Roll on Brexit when all these bubbles will be popped and truth and light will shine again.
    (Perhaps Mrs May really does not have the wherewithal to recognise herself as others see her – self delusion beyond repair?)

  32. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:50 am | Permalink

    Now we have Rudd to contend with.
    You can’t just keep “changing your mind” and remain credible.
    How, for goodness sake, do these people get into these positions?
    Wafer thin majority, no credibility, and frankly always wrong on every judgement. No wonder we’re looking stupid as a country with people like this anywhere near the levers.

    • Mark B
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 4:03 am | Permalink

      Yes, that is the last thing we need, another political self-serving rent seeker.

  33. graham1946
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:59 am | Permalink

    Farewell Mrs. May. You could have been a great PM but chose ignominy instead. You were the second female PM and started well. You made 3 great speeches, firstly on the steps of number 10 when you acknowledged the JAMS and said you would govern for the whole country and 2 more stating the case for leaving the EU which was cheered to the rafters. Then something happened, which seems to happen to all PM’s entering Downing Street, you turned completely turtle and did the exact opposite of what you promised, firstly by adding taxes to the JAMS and then selling out to the EU wholeheartedly. You are looking for a legacy, but threw that away and started to cling to nonsense like the 2050 de-carbonisation.
    We must hope that the malign air inside number 10 does not do for Mr. Johnson, at least until after 31st. October, but I fear he will just accept an amendment to the backstop and try to put the rest through.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:17 pm | Permalink

      Graham1946, Well said.

  34. BOF
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    ‘I reached the point where I decided it did not matter if it was a Remain plot or a massive well intended misjudgement.’

    I share your disappointment Sir John (or is it disillusionment?). However I will never feel anything but anger that Parliament legislated to just leave with the Withdrawal Act and then Mrs May’s Withdrawal Agreement was set to reverse that Act. Mrs May could not have been unaware of what this treaty would do to the country. Parliament, having legislated to leave has ever since seen fit to disagree with itself. Indeed, you could not make it up.

  35. ukretired123
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:31 am | Permalink

    The Bbc aka “Britain’s Brexit Crisis” program next Thursday sums up what they are all about.
    May inviting them into 10 Downing Street was pure opportunism by her in an attempt to deflect the recent disastrous events engulfing her and the Bbc.
    Having a leisurely guide around No 10 passing portraits of last PMs was pure ego tripping.
    I got the impression that she was like a crippled ship holds below the waterline and she looks unwell despite the attempts to laugh it all off.
    The long goodbye for failure and seriously damaging the country would not be permitted in any other walk of life.
    At least Gordon Brown has the good grace to walk out of No 10 when the game was up unlike May who is dragging everything out and sucking the life out of our dear country.
    What a sad legacy especially 100 years of celebrating Emily Pankhurst and women in politics!

    • steve
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:28 pm | Permalink


      Yes I remember when Gordon Brown left Downing Street, I thought his composure was very dignified considering the circumstances.

  36. Yorkie
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    My regional news BBC, is just now pumping up the idea of “One Yorkshire”. Their idea is that it will be like times of yore with people just like them, lording it o’re us, flashing us a quick greenfly infested mouldy white rose flag and ‘off to the wars!’ with them standing behind us, giving us their orders on behalf of us all.
    They understand nothing trying to dig up that old potato. It has become heated somewhat in its time near the core. Burn their fingers it will, and their then kicked bottoms.
    They should consider getting a job outside politics for that’s where they’ll end up in trying to dig stuff up they do not understand and cannot hear and would despise.
    Yorkshire folk have only one land, the United Kingdom minus fake Yorkshire leaders who remind us.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:24 pm | Permalink

      Yorkie, There was no enthusiasm for the regionalisation of England some years ago, and it was voted down in the North East, when Prescott tried. “Yorkshire Forward” was disbanded, like the other attempts at regional control. I thought it was all over. Now the bar stewards are trying again. They never seem to give up. The only way will be to stomp on this, but only UKIP and TBP want to do it.

  37. Ian!
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:49 am | Permalink

    Sir John

    Following on from what appeared to start when Blair reigned over us. Theresa May has taken spurious assertions to a whole new level.

    Her withdrawal agreement, was a construct of remain. The conspiracy theorists out there maintained it was an intended to keep us close to the EU until Project Fear had sowed the seed that being ruled by an unelected superior elite was our destiny.

    It would appear keep saying something long enough and maybe you get to believe it yourself, even though it is not evidence based.

    ‘Project Fear‘ say it long enough and maybe just someone out there will pick up on it and believe. A general Election is won on just 5% switching sides.

    As in in your writings “we don’t believe you” maybe the belief held by the majority, but it is a small minority that will cause a switch and effect power to shift.

    Sovereignty and democracy is about being able to make mistakes and the correct them. Theresa May’s and the majority of her cabinet desire is to rest power from the people and ensure it stays with the so-called political elite. Others call that a dictatorship.

    Even among your contributors you have a small cabal that want sovereignty and democracy removed so that the people can never influence the direction of their country, they appear to want permanent servitude for all with their desire to be ruled by the unselected and unelected. The let’s kill aspiration brigade.

  38. Dominic
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:03 am | Permalink

    There cannot be any pre-Leave negotiations regarding our leaving the EU. This is a ruse. We don’t need a ‘No Deal’ option on the table because there’s nothing to negotiate. We leave the EU and then we negotiate a FTA. Anything other than this is is a Remain deceit to prevent our leaving

  39. margaret howard
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:42 am | Permalink


    ” We voted to leave,”

    Half of us didn’t – hence the unhappiness and discord across the nation. We need another referendum where fanatical Brexiteers will be prosecuted if they tell lies again.

    • Edward2
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:04 pm | Permalink

      How about the lies of fanatical remainers.

      Lies before the vote:-
      Half a million more unemployed
      FTSE crashing
      Punishment budget costing every family thousands

      Lies after the vote:-
      Planes wont fly
      No insulin
      No investments
      No city of London
      No trade deals
      No trade with Europe
      Huge inflation.
      Catastrophe Cliff Edhe Abyss
      Unemployment greatly higher
      Recession again
      Higher taxes again.

      • bill brown
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:15 pm | Permalink

        Edward 2

        you forgot all the lies from the ERG in the process

        • NickC
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 8:59 pm | Permalink

          Bill Brown, Like?

        • Edward2
          Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:27 pm | Permalink

          Which are, bill brown ?

      • NickC
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:29 pm | Permalink

        Edward2, I particularly admired the Remain claim that “for every £1 we put into the EU, we get back almost £10”. That was wonderful impudence. I had never thought of the EU as a Ponzi scheme before, but it did fit. Thank you Remain.

    • Bill
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

      Tony Blair retained his Premiership despite not having at least half the country on his side. Why was that outcome never challenged in Parliament? In a democracy the Laws of the land and the rules of play take precedence.
      In a National Referendum, the majority ALWAYS wins. There can be no other way.
      Had the result been reversed, can you really see the winning Remainers changing their EU project to incorporate and to consider the requirements of the minority 48% who voted to Leave?

      • L Jones
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:45 pm | Permalink

        Margaret DEFINITELY won’t answer that kind of impudent question, Bill!

      • margaret howard
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 2:49 pm | Permalink


        ” Had the result been reversed, can you really see the winning Remainers changing their EU project to incorporate and to consider the requirements of the minority 48% who voted to Leave?”

        “In a 52-48 referendum this would be unfinished business by a long way. If the remain campaign win two-thirds to one-third that ends it.”

        Nigel Farage

    • Robert mcdonald
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:07 pm | Permalink

      Less than half didn’t vote to leave. Normally in a democracy the majority has the decision, although clearly in remoan land the minority must rule.

      • Edward2
        Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:30 pm | Permalink

        Well that isn’t true Robert.
        There was a vote according to the usual electoral rules and leave had a majority.
        The result is recorded on many websites.

      • Edward2
        Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:18 am | Permalink

        Are you counting all who didn’t vote in the referendum as being secret supporters of just one side?

    • Original Richard
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:29 am | Permalink

      What about the biggest EU lie of all :

      “There will be no loss of sovereignty”.

      It started with the loss of sovereignty over our fishing grounds and we have been losing our democracy and sovereignty at each new treaty (which were never subjected to a referendum for consent) for 40+ years.

  40. mancunius
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    “The third phase was when she decided to stop working with the 110 Leave MPs”

    But that was a phase that lasted from 8 December 2017 (publication of the Joint Declaration, with its now notorious Art. 49 in which full passive rule-taking of the customs unio was handed to the EU on a plate ‘if there is no agreement’ [on the NI border]).

    I recall pointing out here the following day that the EU would ensure there was ‘no agreement’ on this matter, and that signing such a declaration was idiocy. It became clear within weeks that it was an intentional misstep.

  41. Denis Cooper
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    I thought we had won the referendum and soon I could stop sending letters about the EU to our local newspaper; silly me, of course I should have realised that our local Tory MP could not be trusted to take us out … anyway, I’ve just sent this:

    “Phil Jones of the federalist European Movement accuses me of being unsympathetic to people living in the area of the Irish land border.

    (Viewpoint, July 11, “Irish border problem is far from ‘invented'”)

    That is incorrect, because I am perfectly sympathetic to ordinary people there, and elsewhere, who hope to carry on their lives with minimum disruption from Brexit; my criticism is reserved for those who are trying to invent or magnify problems in the hope of preventing, or at least diluting, Brexit.

    Which specifically on the matter of the Irish border includes the EU, the Irish government and business lobby groups such as the CBI on both sides of the Irish Sea, as was fairly predictable, but regrettably also includes our own “Brexit means Brexit” UK government.

    We might have expected that our Prime Minister would keep publicly reminding the Irish Prime Minister that it has already been put into UK law, by Section 10(2)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018, that the UK will not unilaterally introduce any new controls or infrastructure on its side of the border, so if there was to be a “hard border” that could only be because his government, and the EU, had created it.

    But somehow that point, and many other pro-UK and pro-Brexit points, simply do not get made by this government, as has been highlighted in previous letters such as that published by the Advertiser on June 7 2018 under the heading “Why lack of ripostes on EU from Whitehall”.”

    Theresa May is a etc ed

  42. BR
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

    Yes you’re right that in a sense it didn’t matter at certain points in time as to whether it’s a plot or incompetence.

    It became increasingly clear however that it was/is a plot since May’s recent statements show just how against WTO she actually is – along with Hammond, so we now know how to interpret history.

    The reason it matters now, is that the parliamentary arithmetic now has a bunch of ex-Cabinet remainers who are freed of any semblance of collective responsibility and will vote against Brexit/no-deal when they were previously obliged to vote otherwise.

    That is why Boris will need to spend a lot of time talking to Brussels trying to get an FTA (discarding the WA completely is essential to have any kind of credibility) and get us to the point where he can say yes/no to any extension with the clear intention of saying no.

    Prorogue may be necessary, with all the legal shenanigans that would ensue. Please tell your ERG colleagues, such as JRM, to stop discussing such mechanisms in the media. If forewarned is forearmed then the remoaners and the EU are more than adequately warned and have a habit of pre-empting such mechanisms with Grieve’s latest amendments while the EU keep all their discussions behind closed doors.

    Boris is right to play his cards as close to his chest as possible and all these hustings and pointless debate/bunfights on TV have done is to make it all the more difficult to keep our startegy to ourselves.

    • Original Richard
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 5:32 am | Permalink

      I actually want us to trade on WTO terms rather than an FTA in order to be able to reduce our ridiculous £100bn/YEAR trading deficit with the EU.

  43. Dioclese
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 1:56 pm | Permalink

    May is gone and I’ve ticked the box marked Boris on my ballot paper.

    I look forward to my Party Membership expiring at the start of August. They’ve lost my lifetime support and their continual begging for money is falling on deaf ears.

    The Conservative Party may not be dead, but it’s expiring rapidly. I hope Boris revives it, but we’ll have to wait and see. Either way, I quit. I’ve joined the Brexit Party. At least they’re consistent.

    To be fair Hammond is also consistent with more Project Fear nonsense today. He says he’ll quit over a no deal, but he seems to be under the illusion that he’ll still be chancellor on 23rd July. The man is deluded. He’ll have no job to quit from!

    Sorry, Sir John. You’re one of the good guys and you deserve better. Hope you get a seat at the table under Boris…

  44. Kate
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:29 pm | Permalink

    Sir John,

    I never had any confidence that Mrs May ever intended to take us out of the EU. My heart sank when she was made P.M. The real key for me was a Cabinet practically full of Remainers and Boris sent out of the country as Foreign Secretary.

    Any business professional about to undertake a major task, would want to employ people who believed in it and planned to get the job done, that is why I hope Boris does not fall into the trap of employing Remainers in his Cabinet.

    The Remain politicians will call on him to be balanced and try every trick to blackmail him to hiring them into his Cabinet, they will undermine him behind his back, do everything to drag their feet and slow down the process as happened during the past three years.

    Why would anyone appoint two Remainer Deputy Prime Ministers if they intended to Leave the EU? If anyone had any doubts, the scandal of Chequers, where ministers were told to take a taxi home if they did not support May’s “Deal” (Which was no such thing), proved it.

    Thank goodness Davis, Boris and Steve Baker resigned.

    Good luck to you all and I intend to celebrate if we are out on the 1st of November!

    • steve
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:24 pm | Permalink


      “Good luck to you all and I intend to celebrate if we are out on the 1st of November!”

      We won’t be – Ms Gina Miller is at it again.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:11 pm | Permalink

      Kate, For me it was the “Kit-Kat” tapes scandal which confirmed how bad it was.

  45. Brit
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    Oh Thanks for the NHS for their wise counsel on how to fall asleep. What would we do without them.

  46. Caterpillar
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

    Off-topic (Back to the leaks)… Has anyone read an explanation of Darroch’s ‘seemingly’ in the leaked comment ” the administration is set upon an act of diplomatic vandalism, seemingly for ideological and personality reasons – it was Obama’s deal”?

  47. The Prangwizard
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Final paragraph is classic fence sitting; afraid to make a clear critical judgement, thus reducing censure now and in the future least something unexpected happen and leaving the opportunity to slide out from under.Not my idea of leadership material.

  48. Peter D Gardner
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

    Sir John Redwood is still unable to admit that the third phase of Mrs May’s premiership came about because Mrs May was converted to supra-nationalism and had come to believe it the best form of government for UK. Her Flor eS now speech was the turning point, after which she set up her back channel with Brussels behind the backs of her own ministers. Historians will decide whether she was a traitor but there is little doubt that she went further than ‘damage limitation and actively pursued government by the EU, particularly in defence. I wrote this up in two articles in The Conservative Woman.

    Her WA took UK out of EU institutions while the EU works up its new treaties to replace Lisbon by 2025. It would then be extremely difficult for UK to get out of the backstop by any route other than accession to the new treaties. And during the transition and ‘backstop’ phases, UK was dimply not permitted to diverge from EU regulation or commercial policy. UK was prevented from developing any advantage over the EU. It is not credible that she was unaware of this reality. From the perspective of the EU her WA was far better than UK remaining in the EU while the EU is trying to develop the next stage of ever closer union.

    • NickC
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

      Peter, That is a sobering thought. But why are “they” so besotted by the EU? Yes I get the emotional commitment, the substitution of their fake ‘EU empire’ nationalism for any vestigial patriotism, but I have yet to see any argument for Remain which stands up to scrutiny.

    • Kathy
      Posted July 14, 2019 at 10:47 pm | Permalink

      Very depressing, but every word true!

  49. steve
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 3:22 pm | Permalink

    On topic –

    Yes goodbye Mrs May off you go ta ta.

    Now, come next election I shall be voting BP. I did think the tories might still have a chance of redeeming themselves, but thanks to the double standards and fear of the PC mob by a certain conservative MP, I am now looking forward to my part in the demise of these hypocrites.

  50. Simon Coleman
    Posted July 14, 2019 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

    ‘Strong Leavers with a history of knowledge and understanding of how to do Brexit were excluded from government.’ I’m sorry, but my understanding is that Brexit has never been done before. And putting Iain Duncan-Smith back in office – great idea – after his Universal Credit fiaso that is impoverishing thousands of people. He would have wasted no time in creating Universal Chaos. One of the biggest problems in delivering Brexit has been the fact that its proponents haven’t a clue how to deal with the various issues arising from it. Had you given a thought to the Irish border before the referendum?

    • margaret howard
      Posted July 15, 2019 at 11:19 am | Permalink

      He was among the worst leaders the Conservative Party have had and that is saying something considering the huge choice! A little man pretending to be a big beast -:)

      But now those out of touch provincial oligarchs are about to give us Boris!

      Reminds me of what they said about the French Bourbon dynasty:

      “They have learned nothing, and they have forgotten nothing.”

  • 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