A happy willingness to disagree

Subject: A happy willingness to disagree.

To my mind one of the irresponsible things about the Brexit negotiation has been the pressure and constant negative innuendo from the Commission regarding the inability for the Brits to come together and make a decision regarding the way we wish to leave the EU. 

Bernier, Mr Junker and Mr Guy Verhofstadt have repeatedly thrown up their collectIve  arms saying that our Parliament is totally ineffectual by not coming to a decision. 

Part of the problem of course has been the EUs intransigence and inflexibility regarding their own rules about membership. The only wriggle room was granted when Mrs May put together a leaving document which the commission accepted because it was shot through with unanswered questions, the answers and proviso totally in the hands of the EU. The Irish backstop was only one of a number of red lines which, if the EU didn't agree with us we were tied into Europe in perpetuity. Mrs Mays document was in effect a 'Remainers charter' drawn up by the civil servant Ollie Robbins, a Remainer and Mrs May who, prior to the Referendum was all for remaining in the EU. 

The parliamentarians  inability to nominate  one of the 'indicative votes' as their favourite was itself a part of the subterfuge. Not having preferential voting which correlates all the votes, first preference, second preference and so on so that it would be very difficult not to get a result meant that the voting would be inconclusive.  Oliver Letwin, who seems to have decided the voting methodology, is also a Remainer.

Sly is hardly a strong enough word to describe the 'Remain MPs' who's aim, ever since the referendum vote, was to thwart the result. The default was to 'remain' because leaving is too hard, too problematical. The Machiavellian art of Political chicanery has reached its zenith fuelling in the voting public all the opprobrium which is about to come its way.

The mockery, coming from the EU Commission and also the parliamentarians in Brussels with regard to the UK Parliament should be viewed in relation with the dictatorial powers of the Commission and the democratic edifice which passes for the European Parliament. The farce of parliamentary procedure in the EU Parliament, where each parliamentary representative is given 3 minutes to make a speech, no across the isle debate, argument or banter, simply a 3 minute statement followed immediately by another 3 minute statement from someone else. There doesn't seem to be any adversarial grouping either and the proceedings were benign,bordering inconsequential. Given that this body of European parliamentarians represent 27 different countries, it's as if democracy was being played out but without any substance.

The Commission, used to rubber stamping their own deliberations are amazed to see democracy at work in Westminster, warts and all, people with differing views given an equal platform and happily, a willingness to disagree.