Firstly, Brexit was won with the slimmest of majorities - 2% either side of even Stevens. It was destined, without a supermajority, to always be a festering sore, especially if it turned out to be a bad decision, which it has, and even more so when it turned into a Hard Brexit. We gave it a go, but it simply isn't working.
Here's a novel idea that could solve a lot of the problems Brexit has brought - re-join the EU, but only under our previous terms.
The benefits would be many:
- Easier travel,
- Cheaper food,
- Fantastic export opportunities,
- No queues at ports,
- A solution to the skills shortage,
- A solution to the Irish Sea Border,
- GFA saved,
- It would counter the SNP's objective,
- Co-operation on security.
Secondly, as for Boris signing a mutual defence pact with Sweden and Finland - one wonders whether Johnson has other NATO members' approval to do this as, in effect, it's the admittance of Finland and Sweden into NATO quickly by the back door.
If not, it's wildly dangerous and a risky ploy to deflect attention from his domestic troubles, as there's a good chance that if the UK is attacked, the other NATO nations could see the UK unilateral pact as a provocative move designed to draw them into a conflict.
Granted that America has done something similar, but defence co-operation is not the same as a mutual defence pact. Also, if it was a defence pact, then America is quite capable of taking on Putin on its own - the UK, Sweden and Finland couldn't.
Also, the UK is in a Joint Expeditionary Force with Finland and Sweden but, again, it's more a strategic equipment integration scheme than a defence pact and is designed to minimise operational friction in the event of a conflicts where both happen to be engaged.
There again, seeing the direction in which the wind is blowing, he's possibly doing his usual trick of running to the front of the queue shouting; "Follow me!"
Lastly, Boris wants to block the prison marriage of serial murderer, Levi Bellfield. I wonder why? Is he also going to call for the enforced divorce of married murderers already in jail? I'll leave aside why anyone would want to marry Bellfield, but surely he's entitled to get married. If not, I'd be interested in the reason. Could it be purely because it's a populist move?
1 comment:
"but only under our previous terms. " I doubt that would be on the table given we had preferential terms.
Your comments on Al de Pf are totally correct but I doubt if he appreciates the implications, Just red meat for the braying brainless.
Bellfield? Good points. Yes, populist along with Petty Patel.
Post a Comment