Head in the Opposite Direction

To Succeed Boris Just Needs To Ask Himself ‘What Wouldn’t Theresa Do?’


James Delingpole
Breitbart London

Only a couple of days now before Britain bids a relieved farewell to the worst prime minister in history. But let’s give credit where credit is due: it wasn’t just Theresa May who was so sublimely useless; it was her entire administration.

Under Remainer Chancellor Philip Hammond, Britain’s tax burden has risen to its highest in over 40 years.  Amber Rudd, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, was heard as recently as last week not pleading to be spared exile to the backbenches (as she deserves) but rather strutting around like some prize hen as if she still owned the whole barnyard, clucking that any future Cabinet in Boris Johnson’s government should have a 50/50 gender split.

Environment Secretary Michael Gove is so committedly in thrall to green lunacy it seems there is nothing he will not sacrifice to Gaia’s sinister, pig-tailed avatar Greta Thunberg: the plastics industry, the British countryside, shooting folk, the millions more birds and bats that this Net Zero policy will help slice and dice — if Ed Miliband or Ed Davey had been running the department it could scarcely have been any worse. . . .

I could go on. But there isn’t space.

Huge Damage Done By Ideologically Driven PM

Police Celebrate End of Theresa May

‘Her Legacy One of Misery’, ‘Country Less Safe’, ‘Officers Will Shed No Tears’

Jack Montgomery
Breitbart London

Police officers across the country are celebrating Theresa May’s resignation, having been thoroughly alienated by the Prime Minister in her previous role as Home Secretary under David Cameron.
Theresa May presided over massive cuts to police budgets and manpower during her tenure, and made “taking on” the Police Federation which represents rank and file officers up to Chief Inspector one of her signature stances — although she seemingly enjoyed a more collegial relationship with politically correct senior officers, such as Metropolitan Police chief Cressida Dick.

As Home Secretary, Mrs May attended Police Federation conferences and publicly berated delegates for “crying wolf” and “scaremongering” when they claimed the cuts — abetted by the left-wing Liberal Democrats, who were in a coalition government with the Tories until 2015 — would destroy neighbourhood policing and lead to the adoption of a “paramilitary style” of policing.

Inspector Gadget@InspGadgetBlogs

Her first duty as Home Sec and PM was to protect the public. 21,339 fewer police officers in the face of huge increases in violent crime and numerous terror plots. Prisons wrecked, forensic science privatisation disaster, ditto probation. Utter disgrace.#TheresaMayResign

350

4:30 AM - May 25, 2019

These words came back to haunt her following the Manchester Arena suicide bombing in 2017, when it was revealed that a Greater Manchester Police Officer — who had been decorated as community policeman of the year by May herself — personally warned her that the course she was pursuing could enable a terror attack.

“I have worked in inner city Manchester for 15 years,” Inspector Damian O’Reilly told the then-Home Secretary in 2015.  I felt passionate about what I was doing but in 2010 I had to leave. I couldn’t take it any more because the changes that have been imposed have caused community policing to collapse.

“Intelligence has dried up. There aren’t local officers, they don’t know what’s happening. They’re all reactive, there’s no proactive policing locally. That is the reality ma’am.”

“Neighbourhood policing is critical to dealing with terrorism. We run the risk here of letting communities down, putting officers at risk and ultimately risking national security and I would ask you to seriously consider the budget and the level of cuts over the next five years,” he urged.

The Manchester attack was indeed followed by “paramilitary style” policing, with officer numbers bolstered by having armed, uniform soldiers patrol the streets alongside them.

WiltsPolFed@WiltsPolFed

As Chair I would like to say my goodbyes to @10DowningStreet. You were a poor Home Secretary and a worse Prime Minister. Your efforts to destroy the police have been, thankfully, as unsuccessful as everything else you meddled with. #police #cryingwolf #yippee

191

2:18 AM - May 25, 2019

The Greater Manchester Police branch of the Police Federation was particularly scathing when news of Mrs May’s long-awaited resignation finally broke.

Chairman Stu Berry said that there are now 21,339 fewer police officers and 15,894 fewer members of police staff than in 2010 — despite the general population exploding and violent crime climbing dramatically — and suggested that “officers will shed no tears at her departure” in a statement published on social media. 

“I feel that I cannot varnish my words following Theresa May’s decision to leave office. During her time as Home Secretary she decimated the Police Service to near breaking point and significantly reduced the service we provide to the public,” Berry said.

“Her legacy is one of misery for thousands of people. This country a less safer place [sic] due to her ideology as serious crime statistics soar in every major town and city in this country. Our members and the Public we serve will continue to suffer the consequences of her dogma for decades to come,” he insisted.  The emotion that she exhibited today were tears for her own self-made demise. It is a shame that she did not have similar empathy for countless victims of crime that could have been avoided.”

The End of the Conservative Party Beckons

Where To From Here?

Finally, Theresa May is resigning.  She has been marked down as the worst Prime Minister in UK history.  No doubt commentators and, eventually, historians will put forward their analysis and views of May and her tenure.

From an outsider's perspective, a comparison with Neville Chamberlain seems apt.  Columnist Madeleine Kearns obliges:

Compromise is indeed the stuff of life. But it is not the same as weakness. In April 1938, Neville Chamberlain, in responding to the threat of fascism on the continent, sought out a number of “compromises” that, if enacted, would have proven disastrous. In an attempt at “peace with honour,” he conceded to almost all of Hitler’s demands. Of course, the EU isn’t quite Hitler. And, thankfully, Brexit is hardly a world war. But it is the greatest peacetime issue of the last century. Westminster knows this only too well, as I wrote in October last year in a profile on the former foreign secretary and Brexiteer Boris Johnson:  

'In the Palace of Westminster, next to the bomb-damaged Churchill’s arch in Members’ Lobby, are four bronze statues that tower over some smaller busts of lesser-known prime ministers. The looming figures are David Lloyd George, Winston Churchill, Clement Attlee, and Margaret Thatcher. Pointing to the latter two, a trusted Johnson aide told me, “We are living in as decisive times as these. And we need a prime minister of such stature.” Not Boris, surely! some will protest, knowing full well that Britain could do much worse. And already has.'

 It remains to be seen what will happen.  Will Brexiteer Boris become the new leader of the Conservative Party?  If so, how will he chart a course going forward with the Brexit Party?  Again from the outsider's perspective, it seems to us that the Conservative Party may well end up being a remnant of what it once was.  Like the UK Liberal Party of today.

Another "Peace-In-Our-Time" Disaster

Deep Throat Insider

Theresa May’s Brexit Deal – ‘It’s a Trap’


Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit “deal” is a deviously engineered, triple-lock trap which will leave Britain stuck for all eternity in the European Union, an anonymous civil servant has confirmed.
The civil servant, writing at Brexit Central, describes May’s Withdrawal Agreement as an “Orwellian misnomer”. Far from helping Britain to leave the EU it keeps it perpetually bound in chains.

He or she goes on to detail the three locks which have been cunningly inserted into the Withdrawal Agreement by legalistically-minded civil servants who know exactly how to sabotage Brexit. 

First is the transition period, lasting until at least 2021.

We must hand over an estimated £39 billion for nothing, be bound by EU law and take orders from an unelected Joint Committee operating under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Will the EU27 agree an equitable free trade agreement before the end of 2020? Unlikely, since all the goodies they want in the “future partnership” are set out in the Northern Ireland backstop, which kicks in automatically on 1st January 2021.

Second is the backstop.

Very, Very Strange

Theresa May's Words Evoke the Style of Soviet Propaganda

For our readers who remain deeply puzzled over the antics of British Prime Minister, Theresa May we commend your attention to a couple of articles by John O'Sullivan of the National Review.

In the first article entitled "Theresa May’s Brexit Plan Is Likely to Hit the Wall"  O'Sullivan addresses May's strange, almost Soviet-like contradiction between her words and reality.

The prime minister has tried to trick Brits into believing that her Brexit is the one they voted for.  On December 11, after a year of secret negotiations and political prestidigitation (or conjuring), Theresa May’s attempt to craft a Brexit will be put to its final test.  . . .

In keeping with the progress of May’s very own, very own Brexit so far, this final test is now said by the Downing Street smoke-and-mirrors machine to be only the first final step, because May’s EU deal now seems likely to end in a Commons defeat. That defeat, if it happens, will be mainly at the hands of rebels from her own party.

. . . . There is some debate as to whether May maneuvered herself into this position or was maneuvered by others into it. She says the latter. The WA ["Withdrawal Agreement"] is the Brexit she always wanted. Also, it’s taken most of the year for the consequences of her Brexit strategy to play out. In fact, they haven’t fully played out yet. Given the strong coalition of Cabinet Remainers, establishment worthies, and media enterprises supporting a less-than-Brexit outcome, or even an outright Remain, we can’t rule out a come-from-behind victory for May, the EU, and their WA deal. But it seems unlikely for two reasons.

Brexit Woes

Hard Times?  Maybe Not

Brexit is a shambles.  At least, it appears that way.  Here are the brutal realities.  British PM, Theresa May has put forward a scheme of arrangement to the Eurocrats running the EU.  It is soundly condemned by members of her own party, who believe it supinely bows to the demands of the Eurocrats.  Boris Johnson, for example, has stridently condemned the May Plan known as "Chequers".

Former Foreign Secretary and two-time London Mayor Boris Johnson made a thinly disguised bid for leadership of the nation Tuesday afternoon at a fringe event at the annual Conservative party conference, calling for Conservatives to embrace popular policies, cut taxes, and deliver Brexit.  The would-be Conservative leader saved discussion of the foremost matter in British politics — Brexit — until the end of his speech, telling the cheering audience at the conference fringe event that May’s plan was a “cheat”, and that “this is the moment to chuck Chequers.” [Breitbart London]

There is not too much doubt about the intent when Boris delivered the punchline of "chuck Chequers". 

At the same time, the Eurocrats have been equally mocking and dismissive of May's efforts.  In fact, they were downright rude--and their rhetoric is getting worse.  A reasonable expectation, therefore, is that May's plan will fall to shreds upon the cutting floor.

Why are the Eurocrats so intractable, one may ask?  It is clear they want to discipline and punish the UK for even thinking about leaving.  We suspect that in the inner smoke-filled rooms, where unmentionables are discussed, the Eurocrats see the beginning of the end of the EU itself were Britain to succeed in leaving.

What remains, then, is the looming hard date of Brexit (29th March, 2019).  May is in an invidious position.

Trump's Foreign Policy, Part II

A Kernel of Truth

A seasoned New Zealand politician cum diplomat has acknowledged that the proposals of British PM, Theresa May for a soft Brexit are troubling.  Lockwood Smith is arguing that President Trump has put his finger on the problem.

Some Truth In Trump's Warning
Claire Trevett
NZ Herald

Former High Commissioner to London Sir Lockwood Smith says US President Donald Trump's comments about the Brexit deal on a visit to the UK had a kernel of truth to them and he was echoing concerns held globally.

In an interview with The Sun that ran as Trump arrived in the UK last week, Trump said the proposals in the Brexit White Paper could imperil a trade agreement between the UK and the US.  "If they do a deal like that, we would be dealing with the European Union instead of dealing with the UK, so it will probably kill the deal."

After meeting with British PM Theresa May, Trump backpedalled somewhat saying May and advisors had reassured them it would not, and he was fine with whatever step they took.  Smith told Q+A that Trump's interview with The Sun was "outrageous" but he was right to flag concerns around Brexit and the proposed trade arrangement with the EU.

New Zealand is one of the countries first in line for an agreement with the EU and Smith said Trump's view on the white paper proposal was a global concern.  "What one's got to sift through is what he did say that actually made some sense and the issue is we need the UK to become a global player.  Trump has pulled the US out of being the leader, say, on global trade. And we need the UK to step up."  He said it was questionable whether the White Paper made that possible.

"A half-way house is not going to work. They've got to see that they've got to actually leave the EU and negotiate a real world-leading FTA with the EU."  Smith was High Commissioner to London until 2017 and is a former Trade Minister.  He is now on the influential Legatum Institute's trade advisory group which is advocating for a "hard Brexit" when it comes to trade.

He had met with former Foreign Minister Boris Johnson a few weeks ago before Johnson quit in protest at the White Paper proposal.

Progress on Brexit

Finally . . . 

This is great news--at least if you believe in national state sovereignty.  The UK Parliament has finally passed a bill whereby Britain's departure from the European Union--Brexit--becomes the law.  The Queen has given her assent, and so even a fall of the current government will make no difference.  Leaving the EU is now the law in the United Kingdom.

A BILL enacting Britain’s decision to leave the European Union has become law after months of debate, the House of Commons speaker announced today, to cheers from Eurosceptic politicians.  Speaker John Bercow said the EU (Withdrawal) Bill, which repeals the 1972 European Communities Act through which Britain became a member of the bloc, had been given the formal royal assent by Queen Elizabeth II.

The bill transfers decades of European law onto British statute books, and also enshrines Brexit day in British law as March 29, 2019 at 11:00pm GMT.

Prime Minister Theresa May said the approval was a “historic moment for our country, and a significant step towards delivering on the will of the British people”, who had voted in a June 2016 referendum to exit the EU.  The bill has undergone more than 250 hours of acrimonious debate in the Houses of Parliament since it was introduced in July 2017.

Totalitarianism and Orwellianism in the UK

What’s Changed in Britain Since Same-Sex Marriage? 

David Sergeant
The Spectator, Australia

Four years ago, amid much uncertainty, 400 British members of parliament voted to redefine marriage in the United Kingdom.  Then prime minister David Cameron announced that, despite having made no mention of the issue in his party’s pre-election manifesto, it would be MP’s who decided the fate of marriage.

Now, it’s Australia’s turn to choose. There’s one key difference. Unlike in Britain, it will be the people who decide.  Everyone agrees, whether they admit it or not. This is a decision of enormous significance.  Therefore, it seems sensible to analyse the consequences of the potential change, within nations in which redefinition has previously been carried out.

In the United Kingdom, it has become abundantly clear that redefinition has affected many people, across many spheres. At first glance, these spheres appeared distinct from marriage redefinition. However, subsequent changes, have proved that they are entirely intertwined.

Gender: 

Current Conservative Prime Minister, Theresa May, has revealed proposals to abolish the need for any medical consultation before gender reassignment.

Will History Repeat?

"The Old B--- Likes It Narrow"

In 1951 a general election was held in the UK.  The Conservatives won; Winston Churchill was returned to power.  These were the days when large swathes of the working class supported and voted for the Conservatives.  Voting was not strictly along the lines of socio-economic class, despite very strong social class identity at the time.  

It took a long time to count the votes, and the final outcome was not known until the following morning.  In his book, Family Britain 1951-1957, David Kynaston quotes the writer Ronald Duncan's encounter with a train porter at Charing Cross.

Blackbirds Coming Home to Roost

Tories Targeted Critics of Islam Instead of Terrorists

Robert Spencer
BreitbartLondon

The United Kingdom and the world are still reeling from the jihad terror attack at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester that murdered 22 people and injured 59, and the country remains on high alert as police have uncovered and are hunting for the members of an entire jihadi network connected with the Manchester attack.

MI5 has also revealed that there are as many as 23,000 jihad terrorists on the streets of Britain today.
That’s an army. And Britain is indeed at war. But this is not just a problem that Prime Minister Theresa May has the responsibility to solve. It is also a problem that she and her colleagues have created.

This Britain of troops on the streets and high tension over another imminent jihad attack is the Britain that Theresa May and her ilk have chosen. This is the Britain of the policies that she and her predecessors, David Cameron,Gordon Brown, and Tony Blair have followed for years. They now have the Britain they have made. In getting to today’s traumatized, bloodied, nervous, frightened Britain, they followed a multi-pronged strategy.

One chief element of this strategy was to demonize and marginalize anyone who spoke too clearly about the motivating ideology behind jihad terrorism.

For years, May and her cohorts have hounded, stigmatized, and demonized foes of jihad terror, falsely claiming that they represent a “far-right” equivalent to jihad terrorists, while appeasing and accommodating Muslim groups in Britain, many of which were by no stretch of the imagination “moderate,” and allowing numerous jihad preachers to operate without hindrance.

A Realigning of the Chess Pieces

Trumpism without Trump in the U.K.

Theresa May shares much of his agenda, but she’s outfoxing her opponents on all sides and gaining in popularity.

By Michael Brendan Dougherty
National Review Online

Donald Trump began fumbling the ball almost as soon as he ran away with it. The political revolution that was Trumpism is on hold for now, while the White House undergoes a series of scandals. All for reasons that are specific to Donald Trump: his lazy personnel decisions, his egotism, his inability to focus or master the forces that govern the Republican Congress.

What if you could have Trumpism without Donald Trump? That is, what if you could take the same basic issues — sovereignty, immigration ruled by law, and economic policies meant to promote social stability — and get rid of Trump’s moral turpitude, personal indiscipline, and the most noxious and divisive parts of his rhetoric?

Well, it would look a lot like the campaign being run by the Tory party under Theresa May. That is, it would look like an electoral juggernaut with revolutionary potential. . . .

Theresa May Leads By Example

The Right of Christians To Express Their Faith

Nick Hallett
BreitbartLondon

British Prime Minister Theresa May has launched a defence of the right of Christians to express their faith in her Easter message.  Mrs. May said the government would stand up for people who speak openly of their religion, and would oppose moves to drive faith from public life.

In a video message, the Prime Minister, whose father was an Anglican vicar, said she was shaped by the “values that I learnt in my own childhood, growing up in a vicarage”.



“We should be confident about the role that Christianity has to play in the lives of people in our country. We should treasure the strong tradition that we have in this country of religious tolerance and freedom of speech.  We must continue to ensure that people feel able to speak about their faith and that absolutely includes their faith in Christ.  And we must do more to stand up for the freedom of people of all religions to practise their beliefs openly and in peace and safety.”

The Beginning of the End of the House of Lords?

Living in Interesting Times

The following piece appeared in one of our local blogs, Your New Zealand.  It was written by a guest correspondent ("Missey") in the UK.  

Before reading we would "set the stage" as it were by reminding readers that the history of English (and Great Britain's) constitutional development from the time of the Bloodless Revolution of 1688 has had at least two general (albeit related) themes.  The first was the development of the primacy of the Parliament over the Crown.  The second, was the growing primacy of the Commons over the House of Lords.

It has been blithely assumed by all and sundry that this gradual development has ceased.  The constitutional tectonic plates were no longer colliding or shearing off against each other, but had settled into a perpetual somnolent state.

Suddenly a taiaha has been thrown into the ground.  The Commons have overwhelmingly passed the Brexit Bill.  Now the Lords (or at least a goodly number of that chamber) are threatening to pass lots and lots of amendments, the upshot of which will be to stymie Brexit, and keep Britain within the EU.  In reaction, open conversations about removing the House of Lords have broken out--something which has not happened for a long, long time.

Today the House of Lords began their first two days of debate on the Article 50  [Brexit] Bill before it goes to committee stage.

Over the weekend a number of Lords said that it would not get through unscathed, and they were open about wanting to do everything to either water down the legislation, or stop it completely, this has put the Lords on a collision course with both the people and the House of Commons.

Theresa May On Song

Britain Will Not ‘Cherry Pick’ Bits of EU Membership

Nick Hallett
Breitbart London

Britain will leave the European Single Market and will not “cherry pick” parts of European Union membership to keep after Brexit, Prime Minister Theresa May has said.  In an article for French newspaper Le Figaro, Mrs. May said it was important to maintain economic links with the EU, including “access” to the single market, but she added Britain cannot accept a continuation of freedom of movement.

“As we leave the EU, we will seek the greatest possible access to the European single market through a new, comprehensive, bold, ambitious free trade agreement,” Mrs. May wrote.  “This cannot, however, mean retaining membership of the single market.  President Hollande [of France] and other European leaders have been very clear that this would mean accepting the ‘four freedoms’ of goods, capital, services, and people and I respect their position.

Britain understands that EU leaders want to continue with the process of integration. We do not, to borrow the phrase, seek to cherry-pick which bits of membership we desire.”

She also warned in the article against giving Britain a bad Brexit deal as the UK is France’s fifth largest export market.  “UK companies are responsible for an estimated 230,000 jobs in France, and French companies for about 370,000 jobs in the UK,” she said, pointing out that the two countries have bilateral trade of €50 billion per year."

The article comes as Mrs. May meets French Prime Minister Bernard Cazeneuve for talks in Downing Street.  Earlier this week, French presidential candidate Marine Le Pen said Britain should not be “punished” for leaving the EU.

“What is the point in punishing a country?” she said. “It is senseless, unless you think the EU is a prison, and you are condemned if you escape. I want to rebuild our damaged relations with the United Kingdom.  A people decides its own destiny. You cannot force a country to do something that is against its own interests, or against the democratic process,” Ms. Le Pen added.

Unusual and Rare

A Believing, Professing Christian

Our view of politicians who profess to believe in Jesus is cynical to say the least.  The reason is that Messiah means many different things to different people.  All Unbelievers weave and construct a doctrine of Christ after their own lusts and prejudices.  Their Christ is made after their own image.  These comments are even more true of politicians and public figures than ordinary people. 

Nonetheless there is something different, we believe, at least thus far, with respect to the present UK Prime Minister, Theresa May.  It is sufficiently unusual to warrant The Guardian publishing an article on the subject.

As the only child of a vicar, Theresa May’s early Christmases inevitably revolved around the parish church. She attended midnight mass on Christmas Eve, and was back in church the following morning, with her mother playing the organ and her father preaching the sermon.  After church, her father often had pastoral visits to make to lonely or bereaved parishioners. Little Theresa – and her presents – had to wait.

Life in the rural Oxfordshire vicarage, and the religious devotion of her parents, Hugh and Zaidee Brasier, had a profound impact on the girl who would grow up to be prime minister.  May’s Christmas interview with the Radio Times marks the third time in just over a week that she has spoken publicly about her Christian faith, suggesting she may be more ready to acknowledge her personal beliefs than her immediate predecessors. . . . 

May clearly has a faith which has shaped her practice over many years.  She was a practising Christian before her political elevation.  That practice has continued, so that the latter builds upon and conforms with the former.  She has spoken three times recently about her personal commitment to Christ and His Church.  Not, please note, to an extrinsic ethic, or an ideal, or a tradition, but to her identity as a Christian.  She has been publicly professing her faith.  All Christians immediately grasp the significance of such an act.