BREXIT – What's the verdict?

An objective appraisal

You may have heard that when, back in 1972, the Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai was asked his opinion on the impact of the French Revolution, his reply was: “It is too early to say”. This amusing anecdote, reinforcing the Western view of the cautious and patient approach of those inscrutable Orientals, is actually based on a misunderstanding caused by poor translation as he was, in fact, referring to the Paris student uprising of 1968 rather than the revolution of 1789. Nevertheless, his refusal to rush to judgement on an event that had occurred four years previously does indicate that China's reputation for taking the long-term view is well deserved.

There is certainly something to be said for this approach. Short-termism has been a curse on both British industry and British politics for decades. Governments, in particular, have no long-term plan or vision for anything. All they seem concerned about is tomorrow's headline. And the media, of course, are even worse. They are bad-news junkies, desperate for their daily fix of outrage and despair, and happy to create it if it does not actually exist. So it is no surprise that, as we celebrate the third anniversary of our official departure from the EU, all the stories are about what a disaster Brexit has been. A more intelligent and measured analysis of the success or otherwise of Brexit would be that 'it is too early to say'.

Or perhaps we should adopt the Mahatma Gandhi attitude. When asked what he thought of Western civilization, he joked: "I think it would be a good idea." Critics of Brexit often say that those who voted to leave the EU had many different reasons for doing so, and that is why the government did not know how to implement it. While it is true that different Brexiteers had different visions as to the best form this should take, there was one unifying theme which every Leave voter agreed upon: 'Take Back Control'. If Brexit means anything it means that we are in complete and unfettered control of our own country, our own rules and our own decisions. But the Brexit that was delivered by Boris Johnson does not give us this at all. So when asked what I think of Brexit my response is that 'it would be a good idea' – but unlike Gandhi, I am perfectly serious.

Boris Johnson's election campaign was to 'Get Brexit Done'. But he didn't. The Northern Ireland Protocol and the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) that he signed with the EU both hand over power to them on a scale unprecedented in history. Why did he sign such treacherous agreements? Was he a cretin? Or was he a traitor? Well, in my opinion, the answer is 'both'. And we are, of course, still suffering now – and will continue to do so until these agreements are overturned. That is why so many people believe that Brexit was a failure. But that is unfair and unreasonable. If someone takes a gun and shoots themselves in the foot it is not the gun that has failed but the shooter, whose marksmanship was so poor. Brexit is merely a means – it is not an end in itself. It gives the UK the ability to make its own decisions, through its own politicians. And if those politicians fail then the responsibility for the failure is theirs, not that of Brexit.

Remainers argue that our politicians were never going to be able to make good decisions and that is why we needed to remain under the control of the EU. It is certainly true that our politicians are morons. One of the effects of our EU membership, where all decisions were made in Brussels and merely rubber stamped by our own government, was the infantilisation of our political class. Their response to any criticism of government policy was that it was all the EU's fault, and they could not be held responsible. But far from being an argument against Brexit this was actually a prime justification for leaving. If we are ever going to be successful as a country we are going to need politicians that are able to govern. For this they will need to be held accountable for their actions – this is the only way they will learn to improve. By remaining in the EU this would never happen, and while it may take a while for them to improve I believe that they will eventually do so. In other words, while there will be an adaptation period, the sooner we get it out of the way the better, and we just need to bite the bullet and get it over with. Currently we are led by imbeciles, cowards and traitors, but the opinion polls show that the people understand this and will kick the Tory retards out at the next election, leaving the party decimated. This can only be a good thing, forcing the party to evolve and improve.

Why has Brexit not been properly delivered, and what can be done about it? The answer to the first question is easy: we have never had a genuine Brexiteer in charge. Cameron called the referendum but campaigned for Remain and refused to allow the Treasury, or any other government department, plan for the possibility of a Leave vote. The country was therefore woefully unprepared for the result and left directionless and clueless as to what to do next. Then came May, who was a Remainer, desperate to retain ties with the EU, and who employed Remainer officials to advise her and negotiate with the bloc. In what universe was that ever going to be a good idea? And then we had Boris the buffoon, a Brexiteer in name only (remember that he had hesitated until the last minute trying to decide which horse to back in the referendum, writing two separate columns for the Telegraph, one pro Remain and the other pro Leave, before finally plumping for the latter) who preferred compromise to conflict and who was happy to agree to anything as long as it allowed him an easy life and the ability to boast that he had delivered Brexit – with no regard for the details (to which he has a well-known aversion). No wonder we have been landed with such an atrocious dog's dinner.

So what to do now? The answer to the problem of the NI Protocol is very simple: just scrap it entirely. It's easy to do and is the only acceptable solution. The Protocol divides our country in two and hands control of part of our nation to an enemy power. No other country in the world does this. I will publish a detailed article about the Protocol later, but the fact is that this agreement is not in our interests - it is there purely at the behest of the EU. We neither need it nor want it, so let's Take Back Control and do what we want. That's what all other sovereign and independent countries do.

As for the TCA, here a little more subtlety is needed. Of course we could just unilaterally resile from it and revert to World Trade Organisation (WTO) trading arrangements – as all serious Brexiteers (including Conservative MPs) wanted from the start. But this would never fly in parliament, so the best solution would be to simply ignore and breach those clauses that are particularly irksome, such as the state aid restrictions, the fishing concessions and the continued budgetary contributions. This, together with the aforementioned scrapping of the Protocol, would no doubt trigger EU retaliation which we could then respond to more severely, leading to a natural disintegration of the agreement and the adoption of a straightforward WTO-based relationship, with both parties accepting that this was unavoidable. We would then finally be free and able to implement the policies that Britain needs to revive its economy (which I shall explain in detail in a future article).

The slimy traitor Sunak is, of course, doing the very opposite, and is determined to capitulate to the EU once again. That is why he has not only suspended all parliamentary debate on the Northern Ireland Protocol Bill (which, if enacted into law, would allow the government to unilaterally change the provisions of the Protocol) but has also introduced legislation to build border control posts for agrifood checks at Northern Irish ports. Worse still, ministers say that this infrastructure will be required irrespective of whether a deal is done with the EU because checks will need to be carried out on goods destined for the Republic of Ireland - even if the government proceeded with the Bill to override the Protocol. But why? Why would we want to impose a border within our own country and conduct agrifood checks simply to placate the EU's hysterical and absurd demands? What part of the UK taking back control and doing what is in our interests does this government of filthy traitors not understand?

The problem is that we do not have sensible patriots in charge, but cowards, cretins and traitors. Sunak, like all his predecessors, wants to negotiate with the EU and make compromises, believing that they are willing to do the same. What an imbecile! He does not understand that the EU have taken to heart that other famous quote of Zhou Enlai: “All diplomacy is a continuation of war by other means”. The EU is engaged in a war against us, and until we reciprocate and defend ourselves we will never win. Only a government determined to act in the British national interest will make a success of Brexit. And that isn't the Conservatives!