And the lesson for today is: who wears out whom

Unlike in the US, over here there is an established church, headed by the Queen, with established gospel readings for each Sunday in the liturgical year.

The appointed reading for today is a parable.

Jesus said, “In a certain city there was a judge who neither feared God nor had respect for the people. In that city there was a widow who kept coming to him and saying, `Grant me justice against my opponent.’ For a while he refused; but later he said to himself, `Though I have no fear of God and no respect for anyone, yet because this widow keeps bothering me, I will grant her justice, so that she may not wear me out by continually coming.”

In other words, the ‘elite’, ‘enlightened’ judge, who was very wise in his own eyes and prudent in his own sight, thought that if he kept delaying the unimportant old widow’s case, she’d give up – he’d wear her out – but in the end, he was the one who wore out. 🙂

A majority of our MPs have no respect for the people (and, it goes without saying, no fear of there being any power greater than the EU or any wisdom greater than their own). They think that if they can keep delaying, they’ll wear us out.

I think they could wear out our patience (I fear they don’t fear that enough). I think they have worn out our trust (and they don’t fear the consequences of that enough either). But as regards making us go away and not come back, I think they’re going backwards.

How do you want today’s negotiations to turn out?

Michel Barnier optimistic of deal after PM makes concessions on Irish border

This may be a minority opinion round here, but I hope that a deal is agreed today. If it is it will probably be a bad deal in many respects. Nonetheless I would prefer not to let the best be the enemy of the good, or more to the point, the possible. Once we are out, new things can happen. I feel the need of some new things.

If, after that, Remainers manoeuvre to block such a deal (after wailing for months about how terrible the absence of one would be, as I was discussing yesterday) – that’s on them. Let them defend their choice to start playing Brexit II: Just when you thought it was safe to look at the news again.

Knowing when to fold ’em

Interesting times. Boris Johnson ‘on brink of Brexit deal’ after border concessions, reports the Guardian, making the best of what is for it a painful dilemma.

The Guardian, along with all the Remain side, has spent the last couple of years saying how apocalyptically dreadful it would be to leave the European Union without a deal. Now it looks like there just might be a deal. Opinions on the Leave side are likely to be divided as to whether this is a good thing, but spare a thought for those Remainers who must now choose whether to accept their salvation from what they said was the greatest peril imaginable, or continue their struggle for the ultimate prize of reversing the referendum entirely – at the very real risk of bringing about the very thing they most feared and finding it wasn’t so bad after all.

The unity candidate

The Sunday Times reports,

Jeremy Corbyn ‘would support John Bercow as unity PM’

This is some new meaning of the word “unity” not previously known to me. I do not believe I am alone in preferring the honest fanatic Jeremy Corbyn to John Bercow.

Jeremy Corbyn has privately told allies that he will step aside and allow someone else to become prime minister if Boris Johnson is forced from power.

Sources say the Labour leader has concluded that he would not win the support needed to lead a government of national unity. Corbyn has signalled to allies that he might support another candidate as long as it is not a Labour or Conservative MP.

John Bercow, a Tory MP before becoming Speaker of the House of Commons in 2009, has emerged as the Labour leader’s favoured compromise candidate after he ruled out Kenneth Clarke, the former chancellor, who was expelled from the Tories last month.

I suspect that this is a trial balloon designed to make Jeremy Corbyn look good by comparison, but if John Bercow does “emerge” his way into being Prime Minister it will make his decisions made as Speaker during the last three years look as if they were nothing but a conspiracy to gain power, a process of emergence from the shadows brought to the threshold of completion by his recent meeting with the EU’s President-of-whichever-bit-of-the-EU-he’s-president-of, David Sassoli.

XR v Brexit: which will cause more disruption?

Extinction Rebellion aim to cause disruption. Obviously they will succeed, if not nearly as much as they’d like. Many Londoners may be made late for work. There will be some economic impact.

Brexitters would rather avoid disruption. Obviously we will not wholly succeed, though the effect may be not nearly as much as Project Fear would like. Many lorry drivers may be stuck in queues. There will be some economic impact.

Between now and the end of the year, which do readers expect to cause more?

(OK, it is not a fair comparison. I’m comparing the disruption caused by an actual no-deal Brexit to the disruption caused by Extinction Rebellion’s mere attempt to make us adopt their policy. If XR actually began the process of shutting down all economic activity in excess of ‘carbon-neutral’ within 7 years, they’d win hands down.)

More generally, how much does disrupting the economy matter in politics? To people who think little about politics except for a few weeks before an election, maybe a lot. To people who think about politics all the time, maybe very little, despite their making a huge song and dance about it.

(I, of course, like to think I have the balance about right – but then, don’t we all. 🙂 )

Light at the end of the tunnel?

Boris Johnson is about to go into a tunnel, apparently. I think that means something like: the EU has agreed to properly sit down and have a talk about that deal they said was the final possible deal.

What will Boris come out of the tunnel with?

  • A deal that gets us properly out of the EU but without any unpleasant trade restrictions?
  • A deal that is Brexit in name only?
  • No deal.

There is a faint possibility that Boris is so good at politics he will get a deal that is just Brexit-y enough and just un-Brexit-y enough to stay in power and get back to business as usual politics with no realignment.

Righty ho, Guy

Just when the Remain side had got some traction for their line about the evils of inflammatory language with that embarrassingly crude tweet from Leave.EU that called Angela Merkel a “kraut” and invoked the two world wars, along comes this soon-to-be-viral nugget from the European Parliament’s Brexit Co-ordinator.

The Independent – not the Express, not the Telegraph, not the Mail, the extremely pro-EU Independent – reports:

Brexiteers ‘are the real traitors’, EU’s Guy Verhofstadt says.

The European Parliament’s Brexit chief has branded Brexiteers “the real traitors”, in a significant escalation of rhetoric from Brussels.

Speaking in a debate in the EU’s legislature Guy Verhofstadt accused Boris Johnson of blaming everyone but himself for the situation the UK found itself in.

“The real reason why this is happening is very simply: it’s a blame game against everybody. A blame game against the European Union, against Ireland, against Mrs Merkel, against the British judicial system, against Labour, against the Lib Dems, even against Mrs May,” he said.

“The only one who is not to be blamed is Mr Johnson himself, apparently. But all the rest are the source of our problems. That is what is happening today. All those who are not playing his game are ‘traitors’ or a ‘collaborator’, or ‘surrenderers’.

“Well in my opinion, dear colleagues the real traitor is he or she who risks bringing disaster upon his country, its economy, and its citizens, by pushing Britain out of the European Union. That is in my opinion, a traitor.”

Let us hope the Liberal Democrats invite him back soon to do some more campaigning for them, so we can see how that line goes down on the doorsteps of Britain. Even in Camden it might be a hard sell.

What was the point?

Parliament will be prorogued later today. It has been sitting since the court judgement – that is during the latter half of the Labour conference week, when it would normally have been recessed, during the whole of the Tory conference week, when it would normally have been recessed, and during yesterday and today, when it could normally have been prorogued.

What exactly has parliament achieved with this extra time? I know of no act passed. What was the point? (This is a real question, not just rhetorical. By all means inform me in the comments if you can answer it.)

It was claimed to be essential that parliament perform its functions during this time. What essential thing(s) did it do?