Pre-Brexit musings

1.  A letter to the Guardian on 26th February from a Will Taylor of Devon claims that: "this whole sorry [Brexit] episode cranked into place as soon as it seemed that the EU might crack down on money laundering and tax havens." 

 It's not a connection that I've made and I'm not sure that the dates match up.  After all, anti-EU manoeuverers  have been disrupting the Tory party at least since John Major's premiership (1990 to 1997 - he called them "the bastards") and I've no idea if and when the EU decided to get its teeth into money launderers  and tax havens.  However, there can be no doubt, as Guardian columnist Aditya Chakrabortty put it (Guardian 26th February) "Brexit was always a project by the right to enrich the right."

All MPs, and Labour MPs in particular, need to remember this when they use their judgement to vote for what is in the best interests of the people the were elected to represent.

 2. I'm interested that when cabinet ministers and arch-Brexiteers come on the BBC to justify what Mrs May is dong they rarely if ever refer to her by name, but as "The Prime Minister." 

Well, of course, she is, but I'm sure this is a ploy to "big up" her credibility - that this is a serious person in high office doing things in the interests of the country rather than a fallible  individual who doesn't seem to be able to distinguish between determination and obstinacy.  I suspect a Downing Street directive.

3.  Apart from the odd flight of post-imperial fantasy about a world desperate to trade with Global Britain the Brexiteers have stopped making arguments about the benefits of  Brexit and merely resort to pious  assertions that the  2016 "decision" is inviolable, almost sacred, and must be obeyed.

 They refer repeatedly to  to the "17.4 million people who voted for it" without ever mentioning the 16.1 million who voted against or the 13  million who were entitled to vote but didn't, and the several million (EU citizens and 16 and 17 year-olds) most affected who weren't allowed to vote. Or they speak of "the biggest democratic exercise in our history" with out mentioning that it could also be the most flawed democratic exercise, given the lies, illegal activity and possible foreign interference.

Nor of course, do they mention that, given the increased  information now available, along with demographic factors, opinion has now shifted.

The arrogant assertions of "It's decided" is rarely if ever challenged by the media and it should be.

4. Labour MP Stephen Kinnock has "deep reservations" about a "People's Vote" because a) it corrodes the sovereignty of parliament and b) it will be very divisive.

He's right on both counts.

So, on the first count, why did he vote for a referendum in the first place (following his successful election to parliament, in a very safe seat, in 2015)?

 And, given his concern for parliamentary sovereignty, why doesn't he follow the logic of his argument and avoid a divisive further referendum campaign  by voting to revoke Article 50  now, and persuading his colleagues to do the same?

Finally, it's not much to do with Brexit, but an international court has just declared illegal the British  government's action in separating the Chagos Islands from Mauritius in order to retain control of the Islands, deport the inhabitants and enable the US to build a military base there.

There's been no mention in the media that I've seen or heard that Jeremy Corbyn has fought the Chagos Islanders' case for several decades..  He was and is right on that, as on so much else, including the disastrous  invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Yet the media, and a substantial section of his parliamentary parhave decided he's not fit to be prime-minister.

 He may not be al that successful at managing his party, but his judgement is better than most.