Switched on the radio to hear the BBC’s Chris Mason telling us that John Major’s ‘support’ for May shows how precarious her position is after the ‘disastrous’ conference speech. Hmmm…no…it shows how strong her position is…she’s going nowhere so Major gives her a little shove…..Major is an arch Remainer and far from being loyal his intervention is a sly backstabbing attempt to undermine her further as he attacks just about every article of her government’s policies calling Universal Credit “messy, socially unfair and unforgiving”. Hardly out and out support. The BBC naturally fails to tell us that Major is that arch Remainer just as it fails to mention that the Times papers are pro-Remain as it reports the Times is saying May will demote Boris. Really or is that wishful thinking to get rid of the biggest beast [or Lion] in the cabinet who supports a Brexit that means Brexit? [May clearly doesn’t as she prefers appeasing Hammond/Rudd, keeping a lid on things, protecting Party before Brexit]. The BBC says…
Asked about speculation she might replace Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson – who has been seen by some as disloyal – Mrs May said she would not “hide from a challenge”.
Why not ask about Hammond being replaced, do we ever hear the BBC raise that possibility? Hammond is Pro-EU and anti-Brexit, the BBC likes him. And why is Boris ‘disloyal’ when Hammond, who tried to hijack Brexit when May was abroad, or the likes of Shapps and his rag-tag mutineers, or the backstabbing Major, are not?
In light of the attempt to unseat May it may be more clear why Matthew Parris, ex-Tory wet MP, a wild-eyed, frothing at the mouth pro-EU raver against the deplorable racist half-wits who voted for Brexit [‘Do not trust these human types.’….of course he meant sub-human really], ‘revealed’ the truth about the Transition Period [as if we didn’t already know]…that it was just a delaying tactic until Brexit could be sidelined by events dear boy events…and of course by the machiavellian manoeuvres of the likes of Parris and Hammond. Why did he trumpet this devious trickery of the Remain camp? Could it be that he knew in advance of the attempt to unseat May and intended to whip up anti-May fury in the Brexit camp by telling them she was betraying their dream in the hope that any Brexit supporting MPs would join the mutiny? More than likely.
Two years before departure, another two years’ transition, and staying in the EU might seem a good idea.
The Brexit crowd are right to smell a rat.
With apologies to fellow Remainers who may accuse me of letting the cat out of the bag, I must tell you that this business of a ‘transitional’ or ‘implementation’ period after Britain has formally left the EU — the plan that Theresa May endorsed in Florence last week — strikes me as carrying a secret threat to Leavers’ hopes: a threat Remainers should not disclose yet.
‘What (Brexiteers fret) if, four or five years on from the 2016 referendum but still a part of the EU, Britain should start to wonder if it’s really all that bad after all? So serious headbangers are desperate that momentum should not be lost. And remember: their supporters are much older than ours. They’re dying faster. Every year there are few hundred thousand fewer. And a Labour government could bring in votes for 16-year-olds. Logic may whisper that staying until we’ve agreed our leaving terms makes sense rationally; but some inner hunch, some nameless dread, whispers to them that it’s better to burn those bridges fast.
‘So guys, not a word about where this proposal for a transition period must logically lead. Not yet.’