Forum Topic

Apparently Rishi doesn't want the job anymore and, while I thought earlier he might be the best candidate, having a billionaire tax avoider in charge of the government during a cost of living crisis is probably not a good idea.You say 'no way' to Hunt and that is a view probably shared by a good proportion of Tory party members but he is one of the few senior Tory MPs that has survived untainted by what has been going on over the last few years. Your objection to him is not based on his ability but his attitude to Brexit.He is now effectively the leader of the One Nation group of Tories that number around 60. On the other side there are probably a similar number of hard core Brexiteers. In the middle are the majority who are self-serving opportunists who will bend with the wind and support the government as long as they are on the payroll.That nobody resigned from the Cabinet this morning could suggest a leadership bid is not going to happen. The only explanation I can come up with is that all the potential candidates have decided it is a poison chalice - the economy is in a terrible state, the cost of living crisis seems likely to only get worse, the flagship Brexit policy is proving an utter disaster. A new leader would inherit all this plus the headache of having to reconcile two large but irreconcilable factions in the party. They collectively seem to have decided to leave Johnson to take the blame and fight it out to be leader of the opposition in two years time. This has the added advantage of leaving it to Labour to start the fraught process of unwinding Brexit.The only consolation for the rest of us is that, the total loss of authority for the Prime Minister, means that he won't be able to force through deliberately provocative or divisive culture war policies. The Northern Ireland Protocol now seems safe as his rebellious MPs won't be persuaded to endorse breaking international law. He'll be a political irrelevance and, if he had any sense he'd resign, but he doesn't so he won't.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1568d

Can you explain your assertion that rejoining the EU would 'cost a fortune'? It is generally accepted now, even by Brexiteers, that the contributions we used to make to the EU are a fraction of the economic cost of leaving. We may lose the rebate we used to have but the relatively slow growth of our economy since departure may reduce our net contribution. Also there will be a big balance sheet gain because we will no longer be responsible for the pension fund liabilities that were passed onto us.I don't think the EU will need to do anything extra to humiliate us if we ask to rejoin and will probably do what they can to ease our path to re-entry.Also, what gives you the idea that they are behaving badly over Northern Ireland? They seem to have done what they can to accommodate trade as they have the incentive of protecting the economy of one of their members, the Republic of Ireland. A UK government report confirms that and completely contradicts the rhetoric of the DUP and ministers. There are more winners than losers in Northern Ireland due to the Protocol and they voted decisively for parties that favour it in the recent elections.Bureaucracy is always annoying and there are always ways that it can be improved, and the EU has done what it can, within the treaty signed by this government to make it work better. However, it really has to be emphasised that all this extra bureaucracy was not the choice of the EU or the people of the island of Ireland. It was imposed on them by the British Government.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 1568d