Author: johnredwood

I attended the social gathering and service at the Salvation Army Church in Sturges Road on Good Friday. I am grateful to the Salvation Army for hosting the event this year and making us all feel welcome.

April 1

I hear that in a timely way EU leaders meeting in private have become alarmed. They are getting reports of a growing revolt in the UK against the long and unhelpful Brexit talks and have decided they need to take it seriously. After all, what would it achieve if they beat the UK government into submission only to find that UK voters were once again insistent that they just want to leave. Last time they succeeded in crushing a UK PM in negotiations it led directly to the vote to leave. This time it could lead to an early exit without any deal.

Germany is very worried they will not be able to export all those cars and manufactured goods tariff free. All countries are worried they wont get the £40bn leaving present which will so ease the financial pain of the UK’s departure. They are concerned that the UK may not be such a willing strategic partner, carrying a disproportionate share of the defence and Intelligence burden for the continent. The UK might become even less willing to take unemployed people from the continent and welcome them into jobs with benefit top ups.

As a result sources close on this special day tell me they are now resolving to let the UK have all it wants in terms of a future trade and economic partnership in the hope that will be enough to assuage the growing concern in the UK about the extent of the give aways. There is even discussion that as the EU thinks you need to pay to trade maybe they should do the paying, as they are the ones with the big surplus and with most to lose. Perhaps all those Remain commentators and politicians who have been telling us how the EU will be nasty, keen to give us a lousy deal, were wrong after all. Maybe the rest of the EU is learning that democracy is a fine thing and the UK has made a democratic decision. Maybe they see the advantages for them. Mr Macron can wield more power without the UK there, and Mrs Merkel can help complete her political union without the Uk trying to hold her back. As a result it is possible the UK will be allowed to eat cake, indeed encouraged to eat cake. Then all the rest of EU all can eat cake as well.

The lecture I gave in Speaker’s House will be shown again on BBC Parliament Channel at 15.10 on the afternoon of Monday 2nd April, for those interested.

This week end Christians remember the brutal execution of Christ and the resurrection.

We read of him as a great figure. The Son of God to Christians, a great prophet or teacher to non believers. His words echo down the centuries. They are as fresh and relevant today as they were when uttered.

Some wrestle with difficulty with the great gap between the peace loving messages of Christ seeking to improve relations between people and to calm tensions and conflicts on the one hand , and the deeds of the Churches in their centuries of power and wealth on the other.

Sixteenth and seventeenth century Europe was ravaged by religious conflict as rival views of the Christian message were used to fight for money and political control. The Church Militant often struck a political pose, supported warring powers, and provided some of the most influential people and arguments to progress the conflicts and hatred.

Gradually the policy of toleration spread, though it took until the last century to arrive at proper religious toleration in most western countries. I welcome the way today in the UK the Christian Churches respect each other and seek to avoid conflict. Today politics in the UK is not primarily about religion. Mr Blair was strongly advised not to do God as PM.

In today’s world there are still religious wars, and still too many incidents of religious persecution affecting several faiths. Sometimes the western allies intervene in these conflicts, with very mixed results.

In the UK we are left with an Established Church that does make forays into domestic politics, with some of its leaders urging their anti Brexit views on anyone who will listen. Often their main idea is that the state should provide a solution for every economic and moral problem. The private sector is usually something to tax and regulate to prevent or alleviate the alleged harm it does.

The MPC has a pessimistic view of the future of the UK economy. They think we can only grow at 1.5% per annum in future. It is true that like other advanced countries our growth rate since the Banking crash and Great recession has been a bit slower than the previous trend, but this figure looks unreasonably low given the scope for technology to carry on transforming our lives and the way we do business. It also offers us nothing for the extra spending at home once we cancel the EU subs, nor for the possible recovery of sectors damaged by common EU policies. They also need to take into account the continued expansion of jobs and the workforce. We have confirmation that the economy grew at 1.8 % in both 2016 and 2017, with the referendum vote making no difference.

Because it is pessimistic about the future, it therefore says it will need to slow our growth to avoid inflation. It’s a circular argument. They say  we think growth should be slow. If it turns out to be a bit faster they say we will need to slow it, because it will not be sustainable without inflation. That’s a gloomy doctrine that does not allow for the possibility that our future trend growth rate may be higher than they think.

They stated in their latest report “Given the prospect of excess demand over the forecast period (i.e the economy doing better) the ongoing tightening monetary policy over the forecast period will be appropriate”. The Bank did relax monetary policy a couple of months after the referendum vote, which helped demand and also pushed the pound down a bit more. More recently the Bank has tightened money by putting up interest rates again, taking action to reduce car loans, mortgages and consumer credit, and withdrawing special facilities for commercial banks. As a result the pound has gone back up against the dollar to where it was before the referendum vote and has even strengthened a little against a strong Euro. The Bank thinks a weaker pound caused inflation, so presumably they think this stronger pound will do the opposite, which should reduce their concerns. They don’t say much about that.

There is still a long year to wait before we leave the EU. This is quite enough time to make any changes that are needed. The government assures us we will be ready to leave with No Deal if necessary.

I want the government to get on with the new borders, fishing, farming and trade policies we can enjoy once outside. I also want to hear how we will spend all the money we save. If we are going to delay our effective exit and give them more money in a prolonged transition there will need to be a very good deal to justify the delay. The message from many of us is Get on with it. Brexit will bring substantial benefits and opportunities.

We have a borders and trade system which works for the rest of the world at the moment, so we know how to live outside the EU.

According to Global Firepower Russia manages to sustain 3794 military aircraft, 20,216 tanks and 63 submarines on the same level of defence spending as the UK. The UK has according to the same source 856 planes, 249 tanks and 11 submarines. The UK economy is twice the size of the Russian one at current exchange rates. Russian wages are lower and a lot of military output comes from state factories which may well subsidise production costs.

These figures reveal why the West takes Russia seriously. It may lack state of the art technology in a lot of its military hardware, and may have problems getting it all operational, but no-one can deny that Russia has a serious military capability able to operate a long way from home if it needs to. It does also have some smart weapons. Russia has allies throughout the Middle East and is seeking to improve relations with China. NATO led by the USA has plenty of firepower of its own to protect its people and member states. The West has recently shown some resolve following the attempted murders in Salisbury. For her part Russia should understand and accept that NATO is a defensive alliance with no wish to extend territory by force of arms.

When intervening in conflict zones in the Middle East Russia and her allies proceed with less concern for collateral damage, less worry about killing non combatants in the anti ISIS war. Russia has taken over as the main outsider defeating Isis, with the West carefully keeping in touch to avoid mistakes in crowded skies over Syria. Russia also has substantial cyber capability, and uses the world media to pursue its policy aims.

Europe continues to welcome large quantities of Russian gas and to carry on trading, despite the obvious political disagreements. I would be interested to hear your thoughts on what NATO as a whole and the UK in particular should be saying and doing about Russian policy.