HYPOCRISY AND FANATICISM - THE REALMS OF REMAINERS.

Today's news contains some stories that truly belong to the 'silly season'.

Firstly, news from Eire indicates that the Irish government is not at all happy about the prospect of Northern Ireland politicians having the final say in matters to do with the border question, post-Brexit. Hang on, when the final say rests with the EU and Eire, courtesy of the "Backstop" it's OK but they won't allow the reverse situation. Hypocritical or what !?

Then there's news from Scotland that a judge is to be asked to consider an entirely hypothetical issue regarding the potential imprisonment of the Prime Minister. It seems that fanatical Remainers now want a judgement regarding whether the PM could be forced to delay Brexit if a deal cannot be agreed and want to know what would happen if he did not. 

It stands to reason that a further delay to Brexit could be enforced if Parliament so determines by the enactment of appropriate legislation; otherwise it cannot. Can a court really say anything else ? As for the matter of consequences in the event of an exit from the EU without a deal, that is a hypothetical question incapable of answer until after such an event and, even then, only with full knowledge of all the prevailing circumstances. 

What sort of world is it when courts are asked to pass judgement on hypotheticals ? Why has this nonsense even been allowed to occupy court time ? It seems it's still desperation time for fanatical Remainers.

JOHNSON CULLS THE CABINET

As if anyone needed proof that we have a new Prime Minister, Boris Johnson provided it in Spades yesterday. Harold MacMillan's 'Night of the Long Knives' pales into insignificance alongside Johnson's 'Culling of the Cabinet'.

By my reckoning, only 6 members of Theresa May's Cabinet remain as Cabinet Ministers, 2 others, Michael Gove and Brandon Lewis, being demoted to the position of attendees. Two former attendees, Liz Truss and Julian Smith, have been promoted to full membership while the Attorney General, Geoffrey Cox, remains as an attendee. All this carnage results in the most dramatic mid-term Cabinet reshuffle on record and means that around 20 of the 32 men and women who will attend Cabinet in future did not do so last week.

Johnson has set out his stall and shown the world that he is serious about changing things; as new brooms go, his has been shown to have some pretty strong bristles. Whether this will produce the desired outcomes we can only wait to see. 

MAY FIRES HERSELF - THE RACE IS ON !

So now we know.

Theresa May will formally resign as leader of the Conservative party on Friday 7th June and the search for a new leader will formally begin in the following week. She will remain as Prime Minister until that search reaches its conclusion.

Her statement outside Downing Street just now was clearly intended to set out the successes of her Premiership as well as acknowledging that she had been unable to resolve the matter of Brexit, but ended with her voice breaking and close to tears as she referred to her love for the country. 

We now have the beginning of a new era. Whatever agreement has been made with her party colleagues, campaigning to replace her has already begun and the many potential candidates are lining up in droves. Boris Johnson may be the bookies' favourite but how often does the favourite fall long before the last fence ? Others may find that they have too little support amongst their parliamentary colleagues and won't even make it to the starting gun, while there's always the possibility of an outsider coming from nowhere to snatch victory on the line.

Johnson, Gove, Raab, McVey, Javid, Hunt, Stewart, Rudd, Mordaunt, Baker, Truss, Leadsom, Hancock - one of these or someone else ?

All will be revealed over the course of the next couple of months.

WHO WILL RID US OF MAY ?

The 'Peter Principle' is a concept in management theory that people in a hierarchy are promoted until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent to fulfil their role. Theresa May seems to be a perfect example of this principle in action.

Following 6 years of relative success as Home Secretary, Mrs May found herself propelled upwards in July 2016, at least partly as she was seen as being the least divisive option to succeed David Cameron as leader of her party and Prime Minister. Ever since, she has presided over nothing but a decline of party, government and her own position as she has failed miserably to get to grips with the increased responsibilities of her elevated office. Her initial procrastination over the matter of the 'Article 50' notice and the calling of an unnecessary general election, for which the Conservative campaign was horrendously mismanaged, presaged nothing but calamity. May's approach in the election campaign miraculously snatched defeat from the jaws of a certain crushing victory, setting up the basis for the current situation.

Media reports have made it clear that she has failed to delegate effectively and has attempted to micro-manage the most problematic issue of her premiership, Brexit. Those appointed to the post of Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, have found themselves side lined and ignored; 2 have resigned, David Davis and Dominic Raab, in protest. Assorted junior ministers have also left that department as Mrs May established her own 'Brexit office' under her own direct control.

As if this wasn't enough, Mrs May then proceeded to agree to various terms dictated by the European Union which she must have known would be unacceptable to many of her own supporters. She attempted, 3 times, to bludgeon this agreement through both her cabinet and Parliament, losing still more senior ministers along the way - Boris Johnson, Esther McVey and now Andrea Leadsom - plus a host of junior ministers, mostly as a result of her handling of the Brexit question.

Her government is now in a state of collapse, her party is in danger of being wiped out in today's elections for the European Parliament, elections which simply should not be taking place in the UK, and her own authority is non-existent. Her MPs are in open revolt and her days, even hours, are numbered.

Given such a catastrophic situation, how is it that she has lasted so long ? There has never been any real prospect of her withdrawal agreement gaining parliamentary approval and yet she has stubbornly pressed on; even the most massive defeats in parliamentary history have not deterred her and yet she has remained in office. Why ? How ?

The truth is that her fellow Conservative MPs have simply not been able to find an alternative leader and none has had the guts to really stir things up. There seems to be greater enthusiasm for a 'Stop Boris' campaign than for anything else. There have been occasional, but fruitless, attempts to make something happen but, until now, these have petered out and May has been allowed to soldier on. Instead of acting decisively, the pretenders to Mrs May's throne have fiddled, tinkered, talked without saying anything meaningful and generally failed to achieve anything. There has been plenty of rhetoric and much bombast but very little has come of any of it. The result is probably the most almighty mess in which this country has ever found itself.

Even now, when Mrs May's tenure is over in all but name, there is delay and procrastination. It's reported that the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbench MPs has held a vote about what to do next, but the result is a secret and won't be revealed until some future, unknown, date. Andrea Leadsom's resignation last night could have been the signal for real action but it's been followed with more nothingness. Currently, we're told that Mrs May is to meet the chairman of the 1922 Committee on Friday, but to what end is unknow. There are suggestions that May will resign, possibly on Friday, possibly on Monday once the results of what is certain to be a calamitous Euro election are known, and possibly by June 10th. This simply isn't good enough.

Members of Parliament are playing politics at a time of national humiliation, paralysis and crisis. The Euro elections are already a lost cause so why wait ? If anything, acting yesterday might have helped to boost the Conservative vote today, even if only marginally. As things are, the electorate have a choice between a hopelessly divided and incompetent Conservative government, a Marxist led opposition, a bunch of pro-Remain parties each out for their own, largely socialist, interests, and the Brexit party which threatens to knock the rest into a cocked hat and could even morph in to a replacement, and real, Conservative party in due course.

If Conservative MPs don't act decisively in the next 48 hours then the sad truth is that not one of them is fit for promotion to the office o First Lord of the Treasury. Leaders act and act ruthlessly, whatever the short term consequences may be, for long term good. It is high time for some one to show true leadership qualities and take action, rather than waiting around for someone else to start the ball rolling. In 1940, when the Cabinet wanted Lord Halifax, a pacifist and appeaser, to replace Neville Chamberlain as Prime Minister, the King took charge and called for Winston Churchill. Today's crisis may not be quite that grave, yet, but similar action is called for. If that means Boris Johnson at Number 10, so be it; anyone will be better than the present incumbent.

Mrs May has to go and has to go now. Who will step up to the plate and make it happen ? Who will be the modern day King ? Who, our modern day Churchill ?

MAY ON HER BIKE - WHO WILL REPLACE HER ?

As the saga of Theresa May drags on interminably, the contenders to succeed her as Prime Minister are mounting in number. The trouble is that none of them is very inspiring.

Boris Johnson is the charismatic choice of many but his flamboyant and frankly often oafish approach renders him problematic. Michael Gove seems to be trying to look like a loyal Party man but surely his vicious attack on Boris at the last such leadership contest has cooked his goose. 

Liam Fox has maintained his position as a committed Brexiteer but has also stayed on in the Cabinet and supported Mrs May whenever it's been necessary. He's a previous failure as a leadership contender so why would he win now ? 

Sajid Javid is desperate to be Prime Minister, which may well scupper his chances. He stood on a joint ticket with Stephen Crabb in the 2016 leadership campaign although the campaign fell at the first hurdle. He does tick lots of boxes for some, but his time in office has not been without it's issues. Rows over Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, knife crime, immigration and citizenship have all blown up, with Javid seemingly looking to do whatever he thought would get him the most plaudits. Ultimately, his obvious desire for the job, added to this list of high profile problems, my be his undoing.

Jeremy Hunt is, perhaps, the smoothest operator of them all and has kept his head down for the most part, avoiding saying too much about anything. However, he's a Remainer, so would need support from a strong Brexiteer if he's to be in with a real chance. The suspicion otherwise would be that it would be simply Theresa may in a suit and tie leading us to nowhere in particular.

Dominic Raab might be in with a shout, but where's he vanished to in recent weeks ? Since his resignation from the pointless job of Secretary of State for Brexit, he seems to have dropped out of sight - has this been a clever ploy or is he just not that significant a player ? Being fairly unknown might help him although being too quiet might not. He'd certainly need a Remainer or 2 on board in any leadership campaign.

Will Philip Hammond be a candidate ? A committed Remainer, he's been a gloomy and uninspiring Chancellor of the Exchequer, issuing a string of negative comments about the probable effects of Brexit. Along with Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, Hammond has been almost 100% wrong and must be a long shot to convince Brexiteers that he's the man for the top job. 

Andrea Leadsom may well have done for her chances with her ill thought out remarks about motherhood when she was a challenger last time around. As with Michael Gove, she may well have shot herself in the foot though as a strong Brexiteer, perhaps she could be the number 2 on Jeremy Hunt's ticket.

Penny Mordaunt has risen to near the top of the tree for no really discernible reason. She has a history of self-promotion, using Parliament for her own purposes in a speech in 2013 and appearing as a contestant on a television reality show "Splash" in 2014. In 2015, she was identified as being one the very highest claimants for expenses amongst Parliamentarians, and in 2016 she demonstrated a lack of understanding about the workings of the European Union. While she appears to be an unlikely candidate herself, she is a Brexiteer and might, possibly, be another who could be on the Jeremy Hunt ticket.

Amber Rudd is clearly ambitious for the top job but is a fervent Remainer. She is from a highly privileged background  and exudes an appearance of entitlement, rather in the manner of David Cameron and George Osborne. She also has a brother who is a strong supporter of the Labour Party. While she could be the number 2 supporting a Brexiteer candidate, her own chances look remote.

Liz Truss also wants the job but does she inspire the necessary level of confidence ? She seems to me to be someone who says whatever she thinks is necessary with no concern for what it means; she's also one who seems to be frequently unsure of her brief and stumbles over her words. For me, she's a no-hoper.

Esther McVey seems to have the brains and is a committed Brexiteer. She hasn't jumped up and down or made a mockery of herself, as have some, but has maintained a fairly quiet and controlled determination. In contrast to Truss, McVey is a good performer under questioning and generally seems to know her stuff. Her resignation from the Cabinet over Theresa May's proposed Brexit deal certainly won't harm her chances. She's another who could certainly be a number 2 to Jeremy Hunt though perhaps her own chances are better than some might credit.

Which of these offerings could anyone really see representing this country with any strength at the international level ? Boris would probably be the "Peoples' Choice", but does he have support in Parliament ? Perhaps a joint candidature with Amber Rudd might work, but  …….. . Of the rest, only Jeremy Hunt strikes me as being "Prime Ministerial" and, perhaps an eventual joint campaign with Dominic Raab or Esther McVey might succeed.

However the cake is cut, they're an uninspiring bunch. Of course, there are other potential contenders and the eventual winner might appear from some previously unconsidered dark corner of the Party. What is certain is that whoever comes on top has an almighty job to do. They have to reunite the Conservative Party, bring Brexit about as quickly as possible - deal, no-deal, whatever - and stave off the threats from both Nigel Farage's Brexit Party and the Marxist extremism of Jeremy Corbyn's mob. After that, it will be all about keeping the United Kingdom together in the face of more calls for Scottish independence, and winning the next general election. 

Why would anyone actually want the job ??

CHAOS, CHAOS AND .......... OH YES, MORE CHAOS !

I had thought that Brexit had reached absolute rock bottom a few days ago, but I was wrong. Yesterday, having rather laughingly "taken control", the House of Commons managed to reject every alternative put before them.

Having rejected Mrs May's withdrawal agreement twice, the Commons, led by the arch-Remainer and egotist John Bercow, voted on a range of possibilities from abandoning Brexit to leaving without a deal, which happens to be the current legal position in the event of no deal being agreed. Having lambasted the government for being in chaos, the Commons then demonstrated that chaos isn't confined to those around Mrs May but is just as rampant throughout parliament.

Speaker Bercow has done nothing to help things with his blatant support for anti-Brexit factions and, now, his reiteration that he will not allow the government to hold a third vote on Mrs May's agreement unless there are significant changes to the relevant motion. Across the Channel, representatives of the European Union must surely be oscillating between amazement, amusement and downright despair as they watch the UK's political class tie itself in knots.

If our MPs weren't so diametrically opposed to the result of the 2016 referendum and actually stood by their own party manifestos from 2017 as well as their previously expressed support for invoking Article 50, the UK would be leaving the EU tomorrow. Shockingly, their duplicity and anti-democratic actions mean that we won't leave until at least April 12th, unlikely though that is, possibly on 22nd May, and much more likely never.

If there is ever a resolution to this farce, Mrs May has now committed to resigning and handing over the poisoned chalice to some other poor sucker, but who will it be ? Front runners include Michael Gove, whose ambitions will surely be killed off by supporters of Boris Johnson, Sajid Javid, whose recent cock-ups at the Home Office must have severely dented his chances, and Jeremy Hunt, a somewhat suave Remainer who seems to have a Teflon coating; Boris, of course, is loved in the party at large but not supported in Parliament, though it's widely believed that if he makes it on to the shortlist of 2 names to be voted on by the national party, he will win. Dominic Raab could be another contender and, as a staunch Brexiteer, he can't be discounted, while there must also be a chance that someone like David Davis could slip in as a short term leader to deliver a Brexit trade deal and then make way for someone from a younger generation.

For what it's worth, I can't see any of the senior women in the party having a snowflake's chance of getting the job. Amber Rudd has shown her true colours as an unreliable member of the cabinet and Andrea Leadsom blew her chance a couple of years ago. Esther McVey, smart though she may be and Brexiteer with it, simply doesn't have the gravitas. Someone who I think could sneak through is current Brexit Secretary, Stephen Barclay, who was virtually unknown a few months ago. He's been sure-footed and calm at the despatch box and has generally come across well. Might he be the 'dark horse' in this race ?

Only time will tell what happens next, and when, and for whom that bell tolls.

THERESA'S RESHUFFLE ISN'T HALF AS BAD AS SOME SAY.

Media reaction to Theresa May's Cabinet reshuffle has been almost universally negative. Some reports, mostly the more left wing ones, have gone so far as to say that the outcome so far demonstrates the Prime Minister's weakness rather than any strength.

To my mind, these reports seem to have ignored reality and been the product of preconceived notions. Theresa May has been Prime Minister for around 18 months and, since the ill-conceived General Election only some 7 months, which is surely far too short a time to be messing around with the most senior positions in her government. The Chancellor, Foreign Secretary and Home Secretary surely had every right to expect to remain in post and yet the sneering BBC and much of the rest of the media has gone into a frenzy about this showing Mrs May's inherent weakness. What rubbish.

Jeremy Hunt appears to have put forward strong arguments for him staying as Health Secretary and has even had 'Social Care' added to his remit; is this a demonstration of Prime Ministerial weakness or of a Prime Minister who has been willing to listen to sense and act on it ? Allied to the fact that Justine Greening, the Education Secretary, seems to have tried something similar and failed, ending up out of the Cabinet altogether, has not Mrs May shown just the sort of strength needed ? In one case she has listened to argument and responded positively while in the other she has stuck to her guns; two similar situations and two decisions of opposite nature.

There seems to have been a bit of a cock-up from Conservative HQ when they announced that Chris Grayling was to be the new Party Chairman when that role was to go to Brandon Lewis but was that the fault of Mrs May ? It hardly seems likely. Half-a-dozen new faces in Cabinet and a tranche of new Party vice-Chairmen doesn't seem a bad job, so why all the negativity ?

When he was Prime Minister, Tony Blair also had his 'immovables' though he wasn't pilloried for it. David Cameron and George Osborne were joined at the hip and others such as Nick Clegg and Vince Cable were untouchable, but little was said about that showing Cameron's weakness. With Theresa May, it all seems to be different. Every cough or hiccup is trumpeted as her 'last hurrah'; the media is constantly on the look out for the next potential banana skin and talking her down. Is this simply a 'hate campaign' because she doesn't play the rather nauseating 'touchy-feely' and media friendly part that Cameron and Blair did ? One wonders.

The biggest problem Mrs May faces from her reshuffle so far is that she's sent Justine Greening to the back benches where she will no doubt team up with those other disaffected harridans, Nicky Morgan and Anna Soubry. That the Prime Minister was strong enough to risk yet another noisy 'Remainer' making trouble says much about her. She ain't that weak nor is she a quitter.

CORBYN OR MAY : I KNOW WHERE MY 'X' IS GOING.

As the General Election campaigns get underway, an assortment of disinformation and downright lies is already being disseminated. Media reporting, particularly by elements of the BBC, is subtly skewed against the evil right wingers and in favour of anything vaguely left wing. However, voters should ignore all of this and remember a few basic facts.

The principal difference between the 2 major parties, Labour and Conservative, is very basic; Labour believes in state control while the Conservatives favour more private enterprise. What this means in practice is that Labour favours higher taxes, more state hand-outs, more state controlled services and industries and, generally, more state interference in the lives of ordinary people. The Conservatives favour lower taxes, less in the way of state hand-outs, less state controlled services and industries and, generally, less interference in the lives of ordinary people. It must be said that, in recent years, these differences have been minimised as both parties have sought the much lauded 'centre ground', whatever that is, and, at times, it has been difficult to tell the parties apart.

However, under Jeremy Corbyn the Labour Party has taken a huge lurch to the left and there are now significant differences between Labour and the Tories. Corbyn has raised the long dead spectre of Keir Hardy, the effective founder of the Labour Party and a man whose principles were forged well over a century ago, in an attempt to reignite a class war that has no place in the modern world. As Prime Minister, Corbyn would reduce the United Kingdom to utter poverty through vast increases in taxation, a massive increase in the size of the state and a huge program of nationalisation that would result in a disastrous collapse in industrial productivity. He would ensure that educational choices are virtually abolished and would destroy innovation; there would be little incentive for anyone to work hard or achieve anything as the state would provide all, until it goes bankrupt. Corbyn lives in an idealised socialist world that doesn't, and never has, existed, though he would make every effort to impose it on us.

In contrast, the Conservatives are more realistic. They know that we still have some way to go to fully recover from the financial crisis of 2008 but they are getting there. They are reducing government borrowing and the UK's economy is in far better shape than most; indeed, only the United States is performing better at present. The Conservatives will continue to support business and will tend to minimize the size of the state. They will provide opportunities for children to achieve their potential through a range of educational routes and they will encourage entrepreneurship. They will allow individuals to keep more of their own money and make their own decisions as to how to spend it. Above all, they will take us out of the European Union and allow the UK to trade freely with the rest of the world.

Forget the headlines and the hype. These are the real differences and this is what voters' choices should be based on. I know where my 'X' is going.

IT'S THERESA MAY FOR ME.

And so the Conservative Party has decided that our next Prime Minister will be either Theresa May or Andrea Leadsom, the final choice to be announced on September 9th.

 

Theresa May has many years of Parliamentary and government experience and seems to be the preferred candidate of Conservative Members of Parliament; she campaigned for the UK to remain in the EU, though was not exactly at the forefront of the campaigning. In truth, she was probably a rather reluctant 'remainer' who rather hedged her bets when it came to choosing sides and has already suggested that her negotiating stance with the EU will be quite tough.

Andrea Leadsom only entered Parliament in 2010 after a career in financial services. She has progressed fairly quickly to junior minister level but has no experience at cabinet level. It has been suggested that she may be a bit of a closet 'remainer' even though she was a leading light in the 'Brexit' campaign, and some of her comments suggest that her negotiating stance may actually be more liberal than that of Mrs May.

Some of Leadsom's supporters have said that her lack of senior government experience is no concern as she has plenty of experience at a senior level in her previous career. They also cite David Cameron's lack of government experience when he became Prime Minister in 2010 which, to me, is no recommendation at all; Cameron has hardly been a Prime Minister who has covered himself in glory and history will largely ignore him except for the glaring issue of the EU referendum.

Theresa May entered Parliament in 1997 and has been at a senior level in the Party since 1999. Appointed as Home Secretary in 2010, she has now been the longest serving in that post for over 60 years, surviving remarkably well in a job which has traditionally been a graveyard for politicians. Indeed, Mrs May seems to be something of a survivor, having come unscathed through the various turmoils of her Party over the last 20 years. Kenneth Clark has been heard saying that she's good but also that she's a 'bloody difficult woman', something which could easily be seen as a recommendation.

I don't have a vote in this contest and, as a committed 'Brexiteer', if I did I ought to be a supporter of Mrs Leadsom. However, I really think that her lack of political and diplomatic experience is a massive stumbling block. Mrs May, on the other hand, does have a track record at the highest level, has the confidence of an overwhelming majority of her Parliamentary colleagues and seems to know her own mind. Consequently, I find myself firmly in the corner of a 'bloody difficult woman'; let's just hope that, as our second woman Prime Minister, she proves to be as tough as our first.