1. Well if someone hadn’t removed the context and allowed people like Clair Fox to interpret it in the context of her beliefs, then maybe things would have gone better today. (Thread)
2. Because when I read the article you posted, from the context it was presented, I believed that it was a big admission that the push to stay in the EU led to the hardest of Brexit.
3. Then when I read through it, it was about strategic mistakes which I didn’t think are overly controversial.
4. It certainly didn’t seem like the argument remotely backed a major admission as described.
5. Then I read it again and there is no major admission here as sold, but a straight forward point of fact.
6. First Peter wrote that our country is going to be disadvantaged and this was the price we will pay for trying to reverse the 2016 referendum…it does sound like a big admission in this context.
7. Then just when I thought he may qualify this statement he made the claim that, based on the facts, it was the right thing to do…so there must be a ‘but’ somewhere, right?
8. And here it is ‘BUT’ when Theresa May’s deal came we didn’t back it, we damned it, and then supported it on the basis there was a referendum attached.
9. He then goes on to write that the Conservative cabinet and the Labour party hated the idea.
10. Before concluding “So the die was cast. Instead of May’s customs union-based compromise, the parties chose first deadlock” and then an election.
11. He then goes on about party failings and where Labour goes. There is no other reference. It is about the push for a referendum on the May deal.
12. There is no “big admission” to argue that because people didn’t back Theresa May’s deal that we ended up with the Boris Johnson deal. I'd argue it’s politically over simplified, but inarguable as far as the logic is concerned.
13. It’s no shock to hear that there is causational link with not voting for something and not getting it, and it does not, in any way, prove someone’s paranoid delusions.
14. Just like there is a causational link between over 17 million people voting against the option that guarantees our Single Market access and not having guaranteed Single Market access.
15. There is a causational link between more than 27 million people, over 85% of the electorate, voting for people who stood on manifestos to leave the Single Market and leaving the Single Market.
16. There is not, however, a direct causational link between voting for an election and leaving the Single Market, there is only a direct causational link between voting for an election and...having an election.
17. But there is, and I can't stress this enough, a causational link between nearly 14 million people voting a party into government that says they will leave the Single Market and leaving the Single Market.
18. This may be controversial to some people, but I guarantee that 60 million voting slips marked either to risk or leave the Single Market, are actually pretty relevant…
19. So, I don’t disagree with Peter that by not voting for Theresa May’s deal, the Remainers in parliament ended up with a harder Brexit, but I would argue Peter has made that sound simpler than it actually was.
20. And it is our responsibility to hire, to fire, and those MPs were doing almost exactly what they said they would do.
21. Because democracy means “Rule by people”, and that’s where the buck ends, with the voters.
22. Yes, we are responsible for the fact that Theresa May’s deal didn’t pass, but we are not responsible that the negotiation had to be made, that’s the responsibility of the 17,410,742 people who voted to leave in 2016.
23. We are not responsible for how the deal came out and the fact nobody wanted that deal, that’s the 13,636,684 who voted for the Theresa May to negotiate that deal as part of her Brexit policy.
24. And we are definitely not responsible for the deal we have now, because that is entirely down to the 13,966,454 who voted for Boris Johnson to implement this deal as part of his Brexit policy.
25. As Remainers, I think we can accept our responsibility for not backing a deal so unpopular even the hardest Brexiteers were called traitors when they voted for it.
Wanting more for our country? Yeah, that one’s on us! 🙋♂️
27. But that is not an excuse for voters to not own their shit.
/End
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Originally Harry came in with false law, and now he is arguing that we would have been held back because the EU countries agreed to take the longer route, but we didn't have to agree...
The whole argument is based around ignoring the counterfactual. These people are imbeciles.
Apart from the fact this is disingenuous because most of the response was down to a rubbish take on the regulation restrictions, which has been quietly swept under the table.
It just ignores the fact we weren't in the room when the decision was made. We don't know what the decision would have been had we been in the room.
(I may have just made up that 11 years, but it goes back to some declaration or other before 2010, and they did report that particular event objectively to be fair.)
This is my favourite from the country who have shouted "We're prepared to walk away" for the last 4 years, and I don't remember anyone calling them out and saying "Well that will be a significant miscalculation".
If the press focus on Priti over this, in a week we'll be being told "we have moved on", but if they focus on failure of the Prime minister to sack her, things might be very different.
The Prime minister wants to be seen as a Churchill, while actually just being spoilt, entitled, and lazy. He knows he is all of those things, but insists on trying to cultivate this Churchillian figure who will see us through Brexit.