Forum Topic

Has Rishi actually pulled it off?

Whatever the details of the deal that has been signed between Rishi Sunak and the EU, the management of the announcement has been really impressive. The backing received from across the Conservative party has been enthusiastic with Remainers and arch-Brexiters giving it the thumbs up and Labour MPs congratulating Sunak in the House.Listening to interviews or Commons speeches by people like Lord Howard, Steve Baker and David Davies, it is clear that a number of talking points have been give for people supportive of the plan to use to create an impressive of unanimity.However, it isn't time to uncork the champagne yet. The hard core Brexit opportunists like Braverman have been silent and Rees-Mogg has confined himself to criticising the role of the monarch along with Farage. We are all waiting now to see which way the DUP will jump and, if they say NO, then the deal will have failed in its main purpose.The portly Iago will be whispering in their ear that they should refuse because he knows a rupture in the Conservative Party over the issue is his only way back into power. He will say, and for once he will be telling the truth, that for all the hoopla, there is a border along the Irish Sea and EU law will apply in the United Kingdom. However, he will also make promises that when he is Prime Minister he will give them what they want. The question now is will the DUP really be so boneheaded to listen to a man that has lied to them and misled them at every point and used them as a tool for his political advantage without a passing thought to the damage this has wrought on Northern Ireland. We should all be hoping, and praying if that is your way, that they don't and they confine to the dustbin the career of a man who arguably has done more harm to this country than any leader since Charles I.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 421d43 Comments

Were you wary of the hidden gremlins when you voted Yes in the referendum to leave the EU?

Andrew Jones ● 417d

In retrospect, the reason this seems to have gone so smoothly for Sunak is that most MPs must have been aware of the damning nature of the Privileges Committee pre-hearings report. Although the greased pig has got out of a lot of tight corners, it seems unlikely he will emerge from this unscathed with a suspension from the House likely if not a recall election in Uxbridge.Johnson was the only likely leader of a rebellion against Sunak and the EU deal because he would have the backing of the ERG headbangers and the Red Wall MPs who believe he is the only Tory leader who could help save their seats. (This could in fact be correct if Labour decide to allow Corbyn back into the party and reappoint him as leader).The plan would have been to cause the deal to fail, leading to a Sunak resignation and a new leadership contest which Johnson would win by acclamation.This was already coming unstuck because Sunak managed to get some key figures like David Davies and Steve Baker onside and because Labour was unequivocal that they were going to vote in favour of the deal but as word spread of Johnson's record of dishonesty being further examined in the House, it cannot be other than many waverers switched sides to back Sunak.The only question remains now what the DUP will do. With no effective support in Westminster, refusing to accept the deal would just be an act of nihilism but their record suggests them doing just that should not be ruled out.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 417d

Andrew's analysis is a much better guide to what is actually happening than what we are hearing in the news because the media seem to be acting with some restraint in reporting, no doubt with a great deal of encouragement from the government.There is nothing to stop him highlighting a number of essential truths about Rishi Sunak's deal most importantly that the border with the Single Market remains very much in the Irish Sea. Also, the ECJ will inevitably be the final arbiter of trade disputes in Northern Ireland and the Stormont Brake is just window dressing. I'd add that the Green Lanes look set to be the preserve of multi-national companies so will primarily serve to allow Marks and Spencer sandwiches to arrive fresh in Northern Ireland.Although I've learned alot from this thread, I will stick with my original position that the masterstroke from the government has been one of news management rather than trade negotiation. Getting public and unqualified support from a number of key figures in the debate particularly from Brexit true believers has essentially silenced the opposition.It is now beyond ridiculous that the ERG and the DUP are still claiming that they are examining still examining the deal. They know exactly what it entails. The delay is down to a failure to come to an agreement on how to respond politically between themselves.It is clear that the Windsor Framework crosses red lines that the two groups have always insisted on so the fact that they have not immediately rejected suggests strongly there is no consensus among the hard core Brexiteers and therefore the ERG can't mount a challenge to Sunak's leadership on behalf of Johnson and the DUP face a choice of meekly returning to the Assembly or electoral oblivion.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 419d

https://www.bsigroup.com/en-GB/about-bsi/uk-national-standards-body/standards-and-eu-exit/

Julian Pavey ● 419d

The UK will be a big enough market for some types of national specific product standards but not for others.  It will depend just how different the UK standards are from the big boys of the EU or US.

Michael Robinson ● 419d

"EU standards will also be adopted by many other non-EU countries that don't want to make the level of investment needed to develop their own standards, or aren't big enough a market to set their own standards."Great Britain for example?

Mark Evans ● 419d

Thanks for that Andrew, it has really helped my understanding much more than the media coverage of this matter. It is a really good example of how, to understand what is going on, you need to ignore the 'take back control' fantasist BS and consider practical realities.

Francis Rowe ● 419d

Non-EU countries like Norway and Switzerland participate in EU bodies for product standards, food standards etc.They can attend meetings, submit proposals, but don't have voting rights.Ultimately it is pragmatism that they know they will need to meet these standards to sell into the EU, and the EU standards will also be adopted by many other non-EU countries that don't want to make the level of investment needed to develop their own standards, or aren't big enough a market to set their own standards.

Michael Robinson ● 419d

Looks like it will be impossible to convince you on the first point but the numbers are available for anyone to check. Obviously the situation now is that Northern Ireland in terms of product standards is subject to regulations which, as they evolve, it will have no real say in their making. The vast majority of rules will remain unchanged so the actual day-to-day impact of this will not be noticeable. With a very few small exceptions, manufacturing for export across the UK will continue to adhere to Single Market rules so the situation in any practical reality is the same in GB as NI. The only significant deviation so far is in agriculture where farmers in GB still must adhere to Single Market rules if they are exporting but face more onerous certification requirements but a deal has been signed with Australia to allow non-compliant products into Great Britain. Given the language used by Rishi Sunak recently and still born nature of any larger trade deals with the US, China and India, the hope would be that this deal will be an aberration, but it does mean that the Single Market needs to be protected against Australian product that doesn't meet the required standards. Even the Minister who oversaw the deal admits it is a terrible one and farmers in GB are up in arms about it as they will be undercut and driven out of business. Farmers in NI will be protected from this, and from whatever tradition they come from, they are practical people who will care little for philosophical concepts like 'No Regulation without Genuine Representation' but will be very concerned about being forced out of business by cheap sub-standard product. It is a nonsense to talk about Nationalist or Unionist concerns in this regard, these considerations simply don't enter the discussion. The agricultural economy of the island of Ireland operates with a seamless unity with many farmers having operations in the North and South. Although security concerns were the most talked about, it was the disruption of this arrangement that caused the most concern for farmers. A land border would have been ruinous for many. It is therefore a reasonable assumption that the interests of farmers on both sides of the political border in Ireland are the same and that the government in the Republic will act in their interests. The Irish government has been clear that it will represent the interests of NI farmers. My prediction would be that the Stormont Brake will be called upon rarely if ever because it is hard to see when it might be needed and that Northern Ireland farmers and businesses in general will far more often be making appeals to the ECJ over concerns about non-compliant products entering their market from GB. This will particularly be the case if Westminster government presses on with trade deals that allows goods which deviate from Single Market standards to enter the GB market. The people of Northern Ireland voted overwhelmingly for parties that supported the Protocol even in its earlier iteration. I see no reason not to trust their good judgement in deciding that the economic benefits of Single Market membership combined with preferential UK access outweigh the largely theoretical loss of democratic oversight of product regulation. If only people in Great Britain has shown similar sound thinking.

Andrew OSullivan ● 419d

AO'S: "London and Northern Ireland very definitely did vote to Remain."RC: As someone who himself voted Remain, I wish it were so. But that is not how National Referenda work.AO'S: "The 'Stormont Brake' does not give MLA's the power of veto over the application of EU Law. It merely allows them to formally raise concerns which will then be examined by government lawyers who will then, if they feel it is appropriate make representations to the EU."RC: And if the EU should then ignore those representations? We're back to 'No Regulation without [Genuine] Representation' again.AO'S: "In practice, the Republic is likely to be a more effective bulwark against proposed EU regulations that might disadvantage the North as they retain real influence over Single Market rules."RC: And what if those proposed EU regulations should disadvantage the North [sic], but be to the advantage of the Republic? One of the reasons why the original proposed settlement was so skewed towards the interests and aspirations of Nationalists in NI and so against the interests of Unionists in NI, was down to the 'real influence' which Dublin exercised in Brussels.Which in turn was a major contributor to the nearly five years of bollocking about which we've had to suffer before we finally got to where we are today.And in any case, what influence does anyone in NI have over the activities of the government in Dublin?Ultimately, the Republic's governement will act in its own interests, not that of another country to which it is not answerable, just like every other government in every other country does.

Richard Cathcart ● 420d

London and Northern Ireland very definitely did vote to Remain. The 'Stormont Brake' does not give MLA's the power of veto over the application of EU Law. It merely allows them to formally raise concerns which will then be examined by government lawyers who will then, if they feel it is appropriate make representations to the EU. In practice, the Republic is likely to be a more effective bulwark against proposed EU regulations that might disadvantage the North as they retain real influence over Single Market rules.  Essentially Northern Ireland, with regard to product standards, is now a rule taker rather than a rule maker. This is unlikely to have a significantly negative impact on people's lives and it is a situation that Norway and Switzerland have been happy to live with for a long time. Effectively the rest of the UK is, in the vast majority of cases, also a rule taker because the vast majority of products made for European markets, including those made in Britain will be made to EU standards. The standardisation of mobile phone power leads is an early example of how this will work and shows that the effects will mainly be benign. None of this is going to be a surprise to people living in Northern Ireland who overwhelming voted for political parties who accepted the Protocol. The economic value of being able to remain in the Single Market self-evidently outweighs any theoretical disadvantages of not being able to determine product standards. Northern Ireland was experiencing an economic boom before a major question mark was raised about the Protocol and now that has been clarified, it is likely to see a massive amount of inward investment because of its unique access to both Britain and the Single Market.

Andrew OSullivan ● 420d

Yeh,only 4ys 9 months,4yrs 2 months and 13 yrs late

Julian Pavey ● 420d

JP: "That raises the question of where exactly does sovereignty lie in Northern Ireland. You are telling us that it is with the DUP but this party achieved just over 20% of first preference votes last May in the Stormont elections. The overwhelming majority of the population of Northern Ireland voted for parties that supported the Protocol in principle. It is often forgotten that this includes many unionists who would regard themselves as just as patriotic as the DUP."RC: (Not wishing to speak for Mr. Fox, but) This misunderstands the constitutional situation currently being addressed. NI did not vote to leave or remain within the EU anymore than eg London did, rather it was the UK which left. And while we were all in the EU, the UK, including NI, had representatives in the EU Parliament and Commission, with all the resulting influence which that gave us, including with the European Court.Meaning that one of the problems of the former Protocol was that NI would still be subject to EU rules, without having any say in them - "No Regulation without Representation", as our American cousins might once have termed it.Which in turn is why the new Framework needs a "Stormont Brake". JP: "If you are saying that people in Northern Ireland should be dictated to by a minority, this can only mean that their sovereignty is subsumed by the broader interests of the UK and resides in Westminster."RC: Re the aforementioned Brake, you seem to misunderstand the principle behind that, too. That is, no minority Party in Stormont, such as the DUP, will be able to dictate the operation of the Framework to the rest of NI.Rather, any grouping which can gain the support of 30 MLA's from at least two separate parties may effectively exercise a veto i.e. determine what the EU may NOT do. In this respect it is merely extending Stormont's normal governance procedure of the Petition of Concern to this area.And the PoC essentially exists to prevent a Tyranny of the Majority, for as Edmund Burke once said: "In a democracy, the majority of the citizens is capable of exercising the most cruel oppressions upon the minority."Of course, there may be a situation whereby nothing gets done due to the blocking activities of some Minority, from whatever side of the house. In which case that is where there has to be a higher power to intervene, that higher power being Westminster.And in this respect, the DUP at least, accepts the ultimate supremacy of Westminster over Stormont, even if certain other parties pretend that they do not.

Richard Cathcart ● 420d

DB: "As Samuel Johnson said, 'patriotism is the final refuge of the scoundrel' Very apt in the case of the DUP."RC: Johnson's aphorism was actually a criticism of the Scoundrel, not of Patriotism.As for the DUP, whatever else one may think of them*, Patriotism is never their final refuge; rather it is invariably their first resort.* - You really don't want to get me started on that shower of Scoundrels...

Richard Cathcart ● 420d

"The EU has treated our negotiators poorly to date"! Nothing to do with the fact that the UK's negotiating position has been aggressive, demanding and threatening? So it's the EU that can't be trusted, rather than the lying, double-crossing charlatan who created all this mess?We inhabit parallel universes, Denis.

Robert Fish ● 420d

Can you tell us what you think these hidden gremlins might be?In broad terms the EU have given trading privileges to Northern Ireland in allowing it relatively unfettered trade with an area outside the single market giving it a unique competitive advantage. I can see why there might ultimately be issues arising that mean that it is a less beneficial arrangement than is initially being claimed but I can't begin to understand how anything in the detail could make this a bad deal for Northern Ireland.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 420d

I am wary of hidden gremlins contained in this "fantastic new deal" promoted by Rishi.The EU has treated our negotiators poorly to date (punishment for having the audacity to leave) and has diminished trust in them.It will be interesting to see the conclusions found in the white paper.

Denis I. Fox ● 420d

I'm slightly confused by your answer. Northern Ireland clearly wished at the time of the referendum to remain in the EU and this appears now in practical terms to have been largely delivered. As Rishi Sunak has pointed out it now has the combined benefits of access to British markets and membership of the Single Market. He describes this as the best trading arrangement in the world which is perhaps and exaggeration but it certainly will make the area a very attractive investment location.I assume by your assertion that it has no desire to be 'a vassal state' you mean that it wants to break with the UK. This is probably not the case at the moment with a thin majority preferring the status quo. I would dispute the description of NI as a vassal state as the government have delivered a deal that the majortity of people from the area wanted. This ultimately will serve to protect the union. An economically thriving Northern Ireland is less likely to want to upset the apple cart by raising the spectre of Irish unity and all the concomitant problems getting through that process will bring.There was never any doubt that the agreement would be approved by parliament but I'm persuaded by some of the arguments made on this thread that the DUP will not approve of it and the main purpose of all the Prime Minister's hard work will be thwarted. The only hope at that point for the future of the devolved assembly is that the DUP do so badly in the next elections that they are no longer the second largest party. The fact the DUP opposed a deal that benefits the people of Northern Ireland so much and that a vote for the DUP will be a vote against functional power-sharing hopefully will mean that the Ulster Unionists bounce back to be in a position to appoint the Deputy First Minister and form a government.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 420d

Jeremy, NI simply wishes to receive the same benefits as the rest of the UK, it has no desire to continue being a vassal state.Once the minutiae of Rishie's deal is unravelled, parliament, including the distardly ERG may well vote it through.I hope it does, this conumdrum has gone on too long.

Denis I. Fox ● 420d

Let's just accept that we accept your definition of sovereignty for a moment which assumes it is lost if any accommodation is required with a supranational organisation.That raises the question of where exactly does sovereignty lie in Northern Ireland. You are telling us that it is with the DUP but this party achieved just over 20% of first preference votes last May in the Stormont elections. The overwhelming majority of the population of Northern Ireland voted for parties that supported the Protocol in principle. It is often forgotten that this includes many unionists who would regard themselves as just as patriotic as the DUP.If you are saying that people in Northern Ireland should be dictated to by a minority, this can only mean that their sovereignty is subsumed by the broader interests of the UK and resides in Westminster. Have I got that right?Let's assume that the Westminster government decided to align its policies with the wishes of the DUP and switched the customs border with the EU to the island of Ireland. This would cause a great deal of economic and political dislocation.Should this happen, wouldn't the people of Northern Ireland start to reflect that their prosperity and security have been compromise by a government for which their well-being is not a priority and against their stated wishes at the ballot box? Isn't this likely to make support for Irish unity much stronger?Where then would sovereignty reside? Are you saying in this instance the British government should continue to assert its sovereignty over Northern Ireland regardless of earlier having accepted the principle of consent by international treaty. What will happen to the 'sovereignty' you attribute to the DUP? Would you expect them to be able to dictate to the extended Republic of Ireland, of which they will form a tiny minority?

Jeremy Parkinson ● 420d

David, Albert Einstein once said "Insanity is making the same mistakes and expecting different results."Very apt in Rishi's case don't you think?

Denis I. Fox ● 420d

Well yes Vanessa, you're right again.

Basil Finnis ● 420d

As Samuel Johnson said , " patriotism is the final refuge of the scoundrel" Very apt in the case of the DUP.

David Burke ● 420d

Robert, the NI protestants are an extremely patriotic people.Granted, Boris gave them and all of NI a rotten deal; but that doesn't prevent them wanting an absolute sovereignty, a nominal sovereignty is nowhere good enough.And the DUP hold the veto.

Denis I. Fox ● 420d

Francis, I totally agree with your post.

Stewart Jones ● 420d

Now you're sounding like Putin.

Richard Greenhough ● 420d

Absolute sovereignty is a chimera. The ERG and the DUP need to adjust to the realities of relations between nominally sovereign cointries.

Robert Fish ● 421d

Hold on, we were told Brexit was done; it was an oven-ready deal. Lol. Sunak has done well to achieve what he has but we are still significantly worse off than when we were in the EU. Johnson’s deal was a heap of c**p, worse than May’s.

Stewart Jones ● 421d

By voting Out GB staked its claim to absolute sovereignty.The ERG and especially the DUP will not entertain interference from a foreign court.That really is the crux of the matter.If you have the stomach for it, Channel GBN tonight between 7pm and 9pm spells out all the traps hidden in Rishie's deal.Or better still, you could put some nice music on, open a bottle of burgundy and sit back.

Denis I. Fox ● 421d

It's not necessarily the case that there remains no point in the DUP opposing the deal. They remain under pressure from Traditional Unionist Voice and this has never been about sorting out glitches in the way the Protocol operates. Whatever Rishi Sunak says, the border between the Single Market and Britain is in the Irish Sea. Northern Ireland is more part of the EU than not with a majority of its residents having citizenship (including a lot of DUP members) and it being in the Single Market. The DUP is occupying an uncomfortable middle ground between old school unionists who recognise the economic benefits of the arrangement and TUV who will never accept anything but a hard border on the island. If the DUP say yes they face electoral wipeout. There is also the consideration of Joe Biden's visit. There should be no delusions that Sunak was largely acting under instructions from Washington to sort this mess out and the clock is ticking. The Americans want Biden to visit Stormont around the time of the 25th Anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement but he isn't going to come if the devolved Assembly isn't sitting. It might be pointlessly spiteful, but the DUP hate Biden and it will be a small victory for them to prevent his visit. Whether Sunak will get credit for his actions if this happens remains to be seen but he has managed to take US/UK relations away from a very dark place. Probably not enough to get a trade deal though.

Andrew OSullivan ● 421d

Rishi Sunak seems to have achieved a very good deal by the simple expedient of treating his counterparties with respect and enforcing discipline within his government for his ministers to do likewise. My jaw nearly dropped to the floor yesterday when I heard 'Brexit hardman' Steve Baker speaking in the warmest terms about the contribution of the Irish government and praising the deal in the highest terms.When he became Prime Minister it looked like he had been given the job as the gift of the ERG with putting the presposterous Braverman in his cabinet as the price of their support. However, since then he has proven to be a pragmatist about Europe and very keen to improve damaged relations. This may be anathema to the real hard core of swivel eyed loons which now seem to be led by the laughable Mark Francois but probably was not enough to those holding lingering hopes of getting a ministerial gong or a place in the House of Lords such as Theresa Villiers and Iain Duncan Smith.The ERG need at least thirty votes to have any influence at all and it looks like currently they are falling short of this number. If the ERG can't potentially bring down the government, then there is no point in the DUP refusing to take part in the Northern Ireland assembly because there is no scenario in which they get what they want.Johnson will be desperately hoping that there will be a faction for him to lead large enough for him to cause trouble but it doesn't look as if this will happen. If Braverman doesn't resign by the end of this week, it would seem that it is check mate to Sunak in a game he has played very well.

Francis Rowe ● 421d

I appreciate that everybody has protocol fatigue, and Rishi has excelled at putting the ball in the net.However, for ratification it has to go upstairs (ie VAR).I doubt whether the hard line Spartans (ECG) will buy it and the obstinate DUP will not be duped.VAR says "Offside".

Denis I. Fox ● 421d

Rees-Mogg - that great proponent of the sh*tstorm that is Brexit - as I understand it moved a big chunk of a business he is involved in to Southern Ireland sometime ago. A bit like the other Brexiteers Dyson and Ratcliff bailing out of the UK yet pushing for the rest of us to have to live with it and the consequences.

Vanessa Smith ● 421d

It could indeed have been agreed much earlier, if it hadn't been for the portly Iago's (great moniker, Jeremy Parkinson!) machinations. The Guardian has an article today by Fintan O'Toole, under the byline "This deal could have been struck in 2021 – but the last thing Brexiters wanted was to get Brexit done". I quote from some of the most interesting paragraphs:"The most obvious thing about the deal announced at Windsor on Monday is that it shows that there was always a deal to be done. As far back as October 2021, the EU formally accepted that the way the protocol was being implemented had to be changed. It made no sense for goods destined to stay in Northern Ireland to be subjected to the same checks as those that were going on to the Republic and hence entering the EU."Pretty much everything that has now been agreed was there to be negotiated two years ago: the sharing of advance data on exports, red and green lanes, flexibility on VAT and state aid rules, an enhanced role for the assembly in Belfast in scrutinising new single market regulations. All that was ever required was normal diplomacy at the high level and nerds lower down to do the nuts-and-bolts stuff."So why was this not done? Why was this row allowed to become a standoff that paralysed politics in Northern Ireland, when everyone knows from bitter experience that its political vacuums are filled by malign forces?"First, because of the inability of the Brexit ultras to wean themselves off the “Those Eurocrats don’t like it up ’em” mode of international relations. The complete failure of bluster and posturing in the negotiation of the overall withdrawal agreement taught them nothing. They remained convinced that the way to get foreigners to do what you want is to shout louder."Hence Boris Johnson’s idiotic Northern Ireland protocol bill. It said, in essence: scrap the protocol that Johnson himself begged you for or the UK will start a trade war with the EU, alienate the US, override its own most basic democratic procedures and declare its contempt for international law even while attacking Vladimir Putin for the same sin. This was never going to work, but it gave the zealots the thrill of one more excursion to the cliffs at Dover to shake their fists at the continent."There was, though, an even more profound reason to avoid realistic negotiations on the protocol. The miasma of craziness that occludes this whole terrain emanates from the inconvenient truth that the protocol is, in horse-breeding parlance, by Johnson, out of the DUP. It was the DUP that made it inevitable by helping to bring down Theresa May, whose “backstop” agreement would have prevented the need for any controls on goods crossing the Irish Sea. And it was Johnson who, with his usual mastery of cynical opportunism, double-crossed the DUP, created the protocol, and used it to win an election."

Robert Fish ● 421d

According to Rishi Sunak in interview Northern Ireland was an “incredibly attractive” place to invest because it was within the UK, but also within the EU single market.Gosh, who’d have thought it?

Alastair Banton ● 421d

'I just wonder they we couldn't have arrived at it a bit earlier.'I agree Keith, also there's the question still of the DUP not liking the fact that the First Minister would be from Sinn Fein, and that's without the 'swivel eyed loons' of the ERG. What all of them should be doing is putting the people they are supposed to represent first and foremost, instead of this pathetic posturing.

Vanessa Smith ● 421d

Brexit means Brexit.

Basil Finnis ● 421d

It is asking a lot of the DUP not to be boneheaded given their political stance is to oppose whatever themmuns support.If the DUP were smarter they could negotiate to ensure all the people of N Ireland get the maximum possible benefits of a relationship with the EU, but they are too tribal for that.It was obvious the DUP were going to get shafted by the Conservatives the second the Conservatives didn't need them for a confidence and supply agreement.

Michael Robinson ● 421d

I think starting the Civil War was a matter of six of one and half-a-dozen of the other. Parliament, and especially the Puritan element, were not exactly looking for a compromise, any more than Charles was. Lord North losing the American colonies was also pretty incompetent, and Henry VI's incompetence set off the Wars of the Roses, but I concur that King John losing most of the Angevin empire (and his treasure in the Wash) takes some beating.

Richard Greenhough ● 421d

Fom what I gather the deal is the old deal wth a few changes and adaptations.If that is the case, I just wonder they we couldn't have arrived at it a bit earlier.Hopefully all parties, however reluctantly, will accept it and move on.

Keith Iddon ● 421d

I thought starting a civil war set a high bar for levels of incompetence in leadership but if you want to go back to King John I'm relaxed about that.The departure of false, fleeting, perjured Borence from the scene will be a disaster for the SNP and it is perhaps that Nicola Sturgeon saw this coming that prompted her to quit.

Jeremy Parkinson ● 421d

What have you got against Charles I ? While I thought Kerr Starmer was quite statesmanlike, as was Theresa May, that bloke who was introduced as the spokesman for the SNP before correcting the Speaker was anything but, using the occasion to try and promote his secessionist agenda.

Richard Greenhough ● 421d

Rees-Mogg disappearing into obscurity, hopefully never to reappear has been one of the plus points of recent months.

Andrew Jones ● 421d