I was told by my MP that Andy Burnham was a magician and that if we got rid of Keir Starmer, all would be well with Brexit. Turns out she was wrong and we have merely continued down the road of the Fabian Society / Logical Incrementalism. I was called up by Dubai TV to explain more last week and made a full film on my thoughts, as, inevitably a TV piece gets cut to a few soundbites. Let’s see the Burnham magic applied, not continuity Starmer.
Please like, subscribe and share
That said, the Remain movement have not changed their spots. We have Jon Danzig proclaiming that we cannot contemplate Rejoin until we have aligned all the political parties in that vision. I cannot recall a time when that has ever happened, including on the vexed question of whether water is wet …
And Niall Ó Conghaile also subscribes to the “Catholic” view that we have not atoned suffciently for our Brexit sins yet. Of course, cakeism is a problem with the “Rule Britannia” outlook of some Rejoiners, but this does not mean we should not apply to Rejoin the EU as a priority.
Champion fence sitter, and friend of Lord David Frost, Prof Anand Menon is also saying that support for Rejoining drops away when you factor the Euro and Schengen into the picture. All such things are above his pay grade in so far that he is not at the negotiating table. The conversation to Rejoin will be a series of trade offs and NONE of us will be at the table. It’s both stupid and presumptuous to factor all the obstacles to progress in at the beginning. Academics can only tell you about things as they are and give some history lessons. They know nothing about the impact of leadership on the Overton Window. Our only job is to create the political momentum to apply to Rejoin as an urgent priority, NOT to imagine that we are at the negotiating table. No wonder Remain lost three times (two elections and a referendum). We are still gold plating the strategy that lost.
With people like this in our corner, who needs enemies? I wrote about the OD (Organisation Development) problems of Remain / Rejoin some years ago under Indonesia. I’m disappointed to report that this is a hardy perennial, needing radical treatment. I’m available for hire if the various big islands of Indonesia need some group therapy although somewhat doubtful that they will take me up on my offer.
Here’s the Dubai TV piece.
Join us on Wed 28 October at 8pm – 8.45pm on ZOOM for a social gathering cum next steps dialogue with like minded people from across Europe. Put the date in your diary NOW, Connect to us on all platforms via Linktree.
In the wake of a humungous £76 Million donation to Nigel Farage’s company Reform UK, after Keir Starmer was forced to step back from applying a cap on political donations of between £100 000 – £300 000 by his own party, I ask the question, does Britain deserve Reform UK? I say this in a slightly tongue in cheek way, yet Labour continue to have Nigel Farage living rent free in their heads, with key figures such as Shabana Mahmood appeasing Brexit accelerated racism. Andy Burnham has recently stifled dialogue on the Brexit Red Lines at the Labour party conference, having only months ago been cast as someone who could “walk on water”. It rather seems that quieter British voters’ voices are ignored in favour of thugs and criminals in balaclavas who Labour hope to convert into voters (0% chance btw). I’m left wondering if the worms will turn? … or whether the horse has now bolted? (choose your own metaphor). In this article I ask the awkward question Does Labour deserve Reform UK?
Does Labour deserve Reform UK?
In 2019, I advocated that Britain should have the hardest Brexit as a kind of “clinical trial”, perhaps for a limited period of 6 months. Of course I was vilified by Remainers, who insisted that we must have a soft Brexit at all costs. Remainers are predominantly risk averse. It turned out that I was right. In conversation with Michel Barnier, he pointed out that there never was such a thing as a soft Brexit. The Remainers were sold the idea of a soft Brexit in order to shut them up. But nothing would have persuaded the Brexiteers of the folly of Brexit better than letting them have 6 months of chaos under a 12% GDP loss, with a “Full Fat Brexit”. Ho hum. The past is prologue.
Complexity confounds causation
Instead, we entered Michael Gove’s world of “Brexit bumps in the road”. Some of the bumps were potholes, others chasms. COVID came at just the right time for Boris Johnson and most people were pretty much unable to trace Brexit as a root cause of their lived experience, due to multiple causation and complexity (see the Brexit iceberg). This is increasingly so, now that we are nearly six years on from the decision. The further we get away from the decision the more causation becomes problematic unless you study the form carefully.
The perils of being reasonable
Labour have systematically ignored the quiet moderates including 70% in their own party. They may as well have formed a cartel with the Tories in 2024 to ensure that Brexit was not expressed as an election issue. Both Starmer and “Continuity Starmer” aka Andy Burnham have stuck rigidly to the Brexit red lines, in spite of compelling evidence that Britain cannot hope to deliver growth in every postcode by 2029 without ending Brexit as an immediate priority.
Watch this film by Truth to Power, which explains the peril of being led by an angry minority. In 628 of 632 seats the clear preference of voters is to Rejoin. The four outliers are the seats of NF, 30 p Lee, Rupert Lowe Life and Richard Lice and even in these constitiencies, the first choice of voters is “Don’t know”. Burnham ignores this at his peril.
Timewasting
Labour have also wasted two years avoiding Brexit and there may not now be enough time to see benefits coming through from an application to Rejoin the EU by 2029. Every time an opportunity arises the Remainers often kill it dead by saying things like “Now is not the time” and other bs. I sometimes wonder if they are batting for the other side.
Only the cat is a good excuse …
A Labour Brexit
Andy Burnham is not responsible for Brexit. But he and his Government ARE responsible for letting it continue to ruin lives and livelihoods. Objectively, this is therefore now a LABOUR BREXIT. Burnham must deal with it by applying to Rejoin NOW, NOT at the next election. Brexit costs up to £240 bn EVERY year, money which would go a long way to building a better Britain.
Brexit Betrayal
Labour seem to forget that betrayal is remembered better than support in terms of voting behaviour. I have given up with trying to persuade Labour to change course as they appear to even ignore their members. Instead I will now do everything in my power to ensure that Labour does not win a second term. You may well disagree with me and are welcome to do so, but the twisted logic runs something like this:
Twisted logic for Hard Brexit Labour
Labour’s Brexit is clearly not bad enough for Burnham to make a U turn … Stuart Budd wisely observes the pattern here:
Does Labour deserve Reform UK?
Burnham’s honeymoon period is over and he has nailed his colours to the mast as “Continuity Starmer”. Lest he forget, Brexit consumes all its offspring … six PMs and counting …
And voting is an irrational behaviour, as proved by the 2016 Brexit referendum when people voted against their best interests. It seems that this is the only behaviour that the large parties understand.
So, should I vote for Reform UK (against my values)? I’m fully aware that this would mean ensure that we get the most awful Brexit available. It may be the only thing that causes the other parties to learn to lead.
If that’s too extreme, how do we guarantee a hung parliament in 2029 or possibly before?
Brexit consumes all its offspring … Will Burnham be next?
