Unpublished letters on Brexit (2)

The conclusion in last week`s Leader that Brexiteers have been "betrayed by mendacious mediocrities such as Mr Johnson" is obviously correct, but it is also true that many people voted in the referendum for Brexit because it was a way of protesting against duplicitous politicians (Leader, 17th November, 2017). A New Labour government, described by many as in cahoots with the City, followed by a Tory-led coalition and then Cameron`s administration, appeared to be mainly ruling in the interests of the rich and the south-east, ignoring vasts swathes of the UK, and have resulted in a popularity surge for Corbyn. This explains the view of the Labour leader`s inner circle, that "opposing Brexit now would undermine" his "political project" (The Brexit wars rage on, 17th November, 2017).

       It also explains why the current "Exit from Brexit" dinner-goers stand little or no chance of "halting Brexit altogether"; the individuals mentioned by George Eaton include no one able to engender trust, and too many who generate suspicion. Labour right-winger Chuka Umunna apparently has "media savvy", but little popular support; ex-corporate lawyer Nicky Morgan is well remembered by teachers for her solution to the recruitment problem being for 60 hour-a-week teachers to project a "more positive image"! Anna Soubry`s voting record on fairer tax and increased austerity is appalling;  Nick Clegg is remembered by everyone for sacrificing any liberal values he might have had at the altar of parliamentary power in 2010, whilst Mandelson`s "intensely relaxed" views on the very rich helped to increase inequality.

    The "greatest obstacle Remainers face" is not "time", but the widely held lack of trust in most politicians. Until Corbyn decides Brexit has to be stopped, the Remainers` case is doomed.

Nick Timothy recently wrote that Philip Hammond "lacks a burning desire to change people`s lives", as if this was the  common denominator of Toryism. As your editorial stated, May has "turned down every opportunity to make things better", with no doubt, another chance scorned this week (Hammond must banish the ghost of Osborne and help the left behind, 19.11.17). The prime minister appears to care little about how history will judge her, and at the moment, she is nothing more than a stop-gap, interim ruler in name only, lacking the courage to stand up to political harassment from Tory bullies.

      She can do little about being a temporary leader, but May could certainly act to change what historians will write about her; William Keegan provided a clue (Brexit lacks credibility - but Remainers lack leadership, 19.11.17). Of course, the Cameron government "should have explained how the whole of the UK benefits from the EU", but it is not too late. No-one is going to take Clegg seriously since his liberal principles were sacrificed in 2010, and too many of the Remainers either also have ambition rather than principle at the heart of their politics, or a name abhorrent to electors, like Mandelson. Corbyn, as prime-minister-in waiting, is correctly election-orientated, so that leaves May.

    She should, as Keegan says, "broadcast to the nation", and come clean about what the negotiations have revealed, that Brexit really does mean economic disaster. It might result in her immediate removal, but at least May would leave office with some self-esteem and integrity intact, with more of the truth revealed about the duplicitous Johnson and Gove, and with historians` judgement likely to be a little more sympathetic.