There’s no business like Brexit business

So, Boris has a deal, a Christmas gift for the nation. And what wonderful choreography! There will be general rejoicing and goodwill to all men – and women and the non-binary.   

It turns out that all the posturing of the past weeks, the ridiculous pretence that no-deal was the most likely outcome, was precisely that, a pantomime concocted for public consumption, a theatrical sword fight that showed both sides were serious and could claim victory when the deal, which was never in doubt, was announced.

The conversation must have gone something like this:

Johnson: You know we will do anything for a deal, Michel, but the public have a thing about fishing, so would you mind if we play up our four new fishery protection vessels (you know they don’t really exist), a bit of gunboat diplomacy for the people at home? Of course, we will agree to all your demands in the end.

Michel: Not at all, Boris. Go ahead. Emmanuel will do the same for the French fisherman, threaten blockades and all that. We will complete the window dressing in time for Christmas Day.

Johnson: Agreed.

But in truth, faced with the latest Covid restrictions, the new strain, the threat to quarantine Britain etc. the public have had enough of Brexit and just want it over. They will accept any deal – and Boris knows that. Even May’s abomination would have passed muster at this stage.

It is impossible to tell yet whether it is a good deal or not. The devil is in the detail, and the detail is embedded in 2000 pages of legalese which nobody has yet digested. Free movement? Who knows? All we have is hearsay. But there is something a bit fishy, not to say stomach churning, about the chorus of spontaneously orchestrated praise that has greeted the announcement of the compromise deal in the Telegraph. Even the normally level-headed Janet Daley announced, ‘The UK has won its sovereignty from a grieving EU. This is as good a deal as we could have dreamed.’ Good grief, you would think that Boris had led his people to victory.

Allister Heath strikes a more cautious note when he writes that although he hopes that this deal is better than no deal, he keenly awaits the verdict of Martin Howe, the Eurosceptic lawyer, whose forensic analysis of the small print of May’s grotesque surrender document contributed much to its demise. But more importantly, he poses the question, ‘What will we do with our new freedom?’

So, will free trade accompanied by tax cuts and free movement of ‘the brightest and the best’ succeed in ‘turbocharging’ the British economy? Or will it just amount to sticking up a ‘Britain for Sale’ sign, and drive us further into the hands of the Chinese? Do we want to be turbocharged? And whose interest will be served by the ‘Global Britain’ agenda – the liberal elite, or the people?      

Merry Christmas

Subscribe to the quarterly print magazine

Subscribe to the quarterly digital magazine

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

7 Comments on There’s no business like Brexit business

  1. Well, foreign ownership (including foreign government ownership) of British assets of all kinds makes an ironic comment on the sovereignty question. As does, our long self-inflicted military weakness as shown by the frank publications of DefenceUK (qv online). The national debt was an issue well before the Covid furloughs. Suez 1956? “George Soros, the billionaire who broke the bank of England, wins big from Brexit,”-“Guardian”, 25 June 2016 (online).

    British political history during the past seven decades has been one of accelerating false turnings, misguided decisions, short-term mistakes, white elephants, false promises, belated expedients, lobby corruption, ideological surrenders, &c. Andrew Gamble’s “Britain in Decline” (1994) is a “leftish” analysis worth pondering, and George Kennedy Young’s “Masters of Indecision” (1962) is a “right-wing” critique still of immense value, the author having been a senior official in MI6 who had the guts to campaign against mass-immigration; Alex Brummer is good on non-British take-overs.

  2. To me, the main matter here is that the EU’s melting away will now proceed at a greater pace.

    Across the Continent, hard-heads in political, public/govt admin, and business spheres will now be turning their attention to the management of the melt-down.

    Sure, anti-Europeanist forces in the European “law” industries will persist in their anti-Westernist ways, and will win some battles.

    But Brexit, as it is now, and as it will evolve, is cause for optimism for all of Europe.

    And it would be useful if large numbers of pro-Westerners in all walks and stations of life, acting in the context of Strong, Independent European Nation States, put real effort into saving local forms of Western Civ that will provide for the security and flourishing of white folk.

    • Dear Harry.

      Well put. ‘big bloc’ mentality has never proved to be beneficial to those who live under its yoke and sovereign states co-operating, as the Treaty of Westphalia intended, has generally worked well despite catastrophic interruptions by megalomaniacs such as Napoleon, Lenin, and Hitler who were defeated largely (except Hitler) by the power of parliamentary ruled sovereign countries. However, one cannot ignore that the successful British Empire was a ‘big bloc’ but formed mostly from colonising by mutually beneficial trade or defeating and replacing primitive cultures in its expansion as opposed to bloody conquest and pillage of their like neighbours.

    • The “security and flourishing of white folk” – the prime necessity of our time.

      My wife and I missed the Winterval Speech by HMQ on the telly, but I have read the reports in the Boxing Day issue in the LGBT+BML agitprop daily known as “The Guardian” and in the far from royalist “Daily Mail”. Her elevation of Mary Seacole was accompanied by her concern for non-Christian festivities. One cannot be churlish about “migrants” who keep the NHS going rather than helping their homeland sick. But HMQ was mistaken exegetically in citing the Good Samaritan to illustrate the “kindness of strangers”. As the valuable “Jewish Annotated New Testament” (OUP 2017 ed, p.649) demonstrates, the parable does not define who neighbour is but what a neighbour should do. Those who passed by the mugging victim with ritual purity excuses could better be compared to those who neglected the sex victims of Asian gangs or who elevate Stephen Lawrence or George Floyd exclusively above the murder victims of Black gangs. In any case, while Jesus may or may not have brought the notion of klndess ton others into a harsh pagan world, he certainly never advocated inundating the nation of Israel with Samaritans, Galatians, Romans, Assyrians, Persians, Egyptians or Ethiopians.

      Robert Hardman in the “Mail” pointed out that, although a “Christmas” broadcast is (supposedly) an overt New Testament occasion, HMQ is “Head” (!) of a “Commonwealth” (!) with more non-Christians among Christians among its 2.4 billion members. This, I suggest, is a bigger albatross around our national neck than Macron and Merkel.

      As for HMQ also as Head of the “Church” of “England”, perhaps she could give maternal, patriotic and spiritual attention to its financial and congregational shrinkage, and the permanent closure of churches reportedly masteminded by the Archbishop of York who told the “Sunday Times” that the Second Person of the Holy Trinity was “black”.

      As the Vicar of Dibley symbolically takes the knee, let’s hope that the astrologers have got it wrong when noting that the “Star of Bethlehem” (the Jupiter-Saturn conjunction) that in the summer of 7BC entered the Pisces constellation, thereby inaugurating two millennia of Christian faith and morals signified by Fish, this solstice winter week 2020 AD moved into the Aquarius constellation symbolising Fluidity – melting ice-caps and constant rainfall, cyberwar and data overflow, mass-migration and monetary chaos, pandemics and pansexualism, conspiracy theories and conspiracy facts, nuclear power stations on nuclear barges and nuclear exchanges….

      • David Ashton, here you have made points that are strong, significant and true.

        I saw somewhere the thought expressed that, given the fluidity of the Age of Aquarius, only those societies will survive which can produce a critical mass of sturdy citizens able to bring to bear strategic order and organisation, and thereby effective and efficient use of resources in the feeding, housing, medicating and policing of the Rest, while also maintaining the borders.

        • Thanks again, Harry.
          We cannot be the only two people whose minds think alike.
          Can we persuade the Editor of SR to print an article along our lines, at the very least?