Brexit: A pain in the arse!

Source of the above image: https://plus.google.com/+GiovanniMariaChiello/posts/UiE2p4ciT98
Life, as the readers of this organ know, often does not go to plan.
One of the consequences of leadership is this: If you make a cock-up it is often the case that others lower down will end up paying for it!
Thus the costs of a bad Brexit will be borne by all UK citizens and UK residents to a greater or lesser degree.
A source of profound knowledge on the area of Brexit is of course Doctor Richard North’s blog and his blog-post today is another valuable contribution to the public’s knowledge on the matter.
GOTO: http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=87064
It seems if Dr. North is correct that Madame Mayhem is intending to take the country into a Brexit which is considerably inferior to what we could have had if the politicians had had the common sense to adopt the only sensible Brexit strategy and that is Flexcit.
GOTO: http://www.eureferendum.com/documents/flexcit.pdf
I can imagine a foreign policy expert at the US State Department describing – IF it ever comes to pass – Madame Mayhem’s as being “sub-optimal” a “Sub-optimal Brexit”
The ONE objective the EU will want to achieve is this: That it will be as clear as day to ANY other EU member state that an arrangement outside the EU will be INFERIOR to membership of the EU.
Madame Mayhem will have been of the greatest assistance in this endeavour for it appears that the Europhile establishment in this formerly sovereign United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have assiduously avoided the one Brexit option that that US foreign policy expert would have described as an “Optimal Brexit”. The problem for the EU had the UK had opted for Flexcit (EFTA + EEA membership) would be that there would be other EU members who would see that this is a more attractive option than EU membership and there would be a prospect of the continent of Europe breaking up into two blocs:
#1: The EU/Eurozone bloc and:
#2: The EFTA/EEA bloc.
Since the UK would be the largest – in terms of population and economy – member of the second bloc, it would be the leader of that bloc!
This is NOT something that would please the politicians in Berlin or Paris!
Of course, Madame Mayhem is using the claims of the leave campaign to justify her rejection of Flexcit!
And she has a point as virtually every member of UKIP would only be too eager to point out!
Here is a FACT: Many who voters leave regard Flexcit as NOT leaving the EU. They have coined a term for it: BRINO – Brexit in name only!
What they want is to have the UK outside the EU and outside the EEA and of course, the EU Customs Union!
There is much talk by Madame Mayhem her acolytes and her creatures about the dangers to British democracy of reneging on the referendum vote. They are right to voice these concerns. Let us not forget that arch Europhile, The Right Honourable David Lammy, PC, FRSA, the Member for Tottenham who upon receiving the news that the British People had had the temerity to vote for the re-establishment of lawful government, announced that in his opinion the referendum, being advisory should be ignored!
Of course, had the EU’s favourite MP had gotten his way, British democracy would most assuredly been grievously damaged!
However Madame Mayhem’s strategy is going to damage British democracy in any event. This is because a sub-optimal Brexit will be like a weak acid gently rotten at the carcass that is the British body politic.
Here is another FACT: The EU Referendum of 2016 was deeply, deeply flawed. BOTH sides LIED.
Here is another FACT: That the Remain side LIED is irrelevant! This is because as many Kippers delight in stating to any Remainer who comes within earshot, “We won! You lost!”
Faced with a sub-optimal Brexit a future government may seek to try and negotiate an approximation of Flexcit (EFTA+EEA).
The problem British democracy will have with Madame Mayhem’s “sub-optimal Brexit” is one of chickens coming home to roost. Of reduced economic performance and inward investment. Of being in the truest sense, a rule taker having no say in the drafting of said rules!
Those who voted Leave will – justly – feel betrayed. Those who voted Remain will have their concerns about Leaving confirmed. This will be a “sub-optimal Brexit” with no supporters.
Remember the saying: “Success has many fathers. Failure is an orphan!”
Here is a FACT: IF one is genuinely concerned about British democracy one could argue that the democratic course of action is this:
Put the Brexit issue to a second referendum with these two options:
#1: That Parliament legislate for the Withdrawal Deal negotiated by HMG.
#2: That Parliament repeal The European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (c. 16) and associated legislation revoking Article 50 and remaining in the EU.
This curiously would be a way out of the parliamentary impasse!
NB #1: IF as this organ expects the so-called European Court of Justice decrees that the UK can revoke Article 50 without recourse to the EU Commission for permission and all opt outs accorded to it as of 22nd June 2016 will remain extant, then many MPs may find the above speculation attractive as it gets them off the hook of a painful dilemma.
NB #2: Were there to be such a referendum I could never vote to continue unlawful government! The Withdrawal Deal creates a temporary arrangement.
NB #3: Where there is life, there is hope. Were the UK to “Brexit” in the manner proposed under Madame mayhem’s terrible deal, there is the prospect of the UK rejoining EFTA and the EEA. The result of Madame’s bungling would have been to make the whole Brexit process far more costly and far more time consuming than it ever needed to be!