Sunday, 26 June 2016

Onen Hag Oll

It is perfectly reasonable for Cornwall, having voted Leave, to seek assurances about the continuation of the funding that it currently receives via the EU.

I say "via", because that has only ever been the United Kingdom's money back.

Every area, many of them extremely poor, that voted Leave ought to seek the same assurances. And Jeremy Corbyn ought to give them.

As should Tom Watson, around whom, with the resignation of the far from right-wing Karl Turner, matters are very obviously coalescing.

By the way, Cornwall Council, which is the name of the unitary authority, is Liberal Democrat led. How many areas under such leadership or control voted Leave?


  1. Neither Jeremy Corbyn nor any other Remain campaigner can possibly seek to profit in any way from a referendum they lost.

    It would be beyond perverse.

    He had his chance to join our campaign and abandoned his principles like the coward he is.

    Frank Field and the tiny few honourable Labour MPs who did join the Leave campaign have only proved how unrepresentative their party is of its own voters.

    As the Financial Times notes, in a rare moment of agreement with Peter Hitchens, the lesson of this referendum is that the Tory and Labour parties' existence merely serves to divide two sets of voters-the Tory Right and Labour Left- who disagree with both their own parties and very largely agree with each other.

    They are kept apart at elections by tribal loyalty.

    The referendum freed both sets of voters to unite against their own parties.

    It proved that majority Peter Hitchens has always said was there, really does exist and shows what it could achieve freed from the shackles of these dead parties.

    1. They are kept apart at elections by tribal loyalty.

      And they always will be. The point is control of the two main parties.

  2. No they will be divided-only while those two parties remain there. Because as the Financial Times astutely observed they are relics of the divisions of opinion in the Industrial Revolution (when nobody here was in favour of Continental rule, unlimited immigration from the Continent or any of the other things that divide us today) and are utterly unrepresentative of the fault lines in the country today.

    1. They are not going anywhere. That was a long time ago, and they still haven't been replaced. They will be changed, as they often have been. The key is to change them in the right ways. But in themselves, they are permanent, with everything that that entails.

  3. They can't be "changed" because they don't stand for the things that separate people outside the Westminster bubble.

    Look at them this weekend; mass resignations, one and potentially both party leaders going, and a referendum result that has exposed the fact that both of their MPs plainly have never even met, let alone have anything in common with, their own voters.

    As the FT article noted, the rumour is that many Tory and Labour MPs mingling in the Remain campaign HQ, actually found they got on rather well.

    Well, how lovely.

    They should no longer be forced to pretend they are opponents, and should join together and make way for a party to represent those who disagree with them.

    Which is over half the country, it seems.