Today’s letters are about Brexit, reflecting on various reports in the MSM. The first letter is from our correspondent Geoffrey Brooking:
So, the so called Brexiteer that is Penny Mordaunt (even though she has kept stum for so long) tells Cabinet a story of a flight where the captain changes course half way and compares it to Brexit.
Why am I so surprised?
This stinks of political opportunism.
Has she been training for a leadership election again?
Perhaps if the airline sacked the captain before it took a detour in the first place, we wouldn’t all be the victims of treachery on such a grand scale at the hands of Appeaser Theresa?
No wonder Michael Gove advised our Penelope that such a time is when one has a Gin and Tonic.We all know the feeling Michael, except that instead of standing up for Britain, these Tory Brexiteers had a few G and T’s too many.
Never mind hey. Come the next election it won’t be a flight detour on the Tories’ mind but more the case of a plane crash on an epic scale.
Respectfully, Geoffrey Brooking
The next letter is from a reader in Swindon who looks at the infamous poll brandished about by Remainers, according to which more people would now vote to Remain:
With regard to the Channel 4 Poll, this was selectively compiled by them and the BBC, an avowed supporter of the EU and notorious for their unbalanced reporting on Brexit. They have in fact been pushing non stop EU propaganda for years and receiving lavish funding from the EU in Brussels, at the same time not giving the Leave side a fair platform for reply.
Consequently it is possible they may have had some influence in steering public opinion away from Brexit and in any poll the results will partly depend on the kind of wording in the questions asked.
It is worth noting that the poll only sampled 0.1% of the number of people who voted for BREXIT, which was an unprecedented 17,410,742, the largest recorded vote on any single issue throughout the history of the UK.
So it can hardly be called representative of the Nation. To say that 54% of the voting population would now vote to remain in the EU based on such a small poll is naive at best and downright dishonest at worst.
As regards a supposed swing to Remain in Swindon*) of 7%, what was the sample size and what cross section of the local population was sampled? This so-called swing could still be statistically insignificant.
(Note: *) Population 220,363 in 2017, eligible voters approximately 60%, so a 7% swing would still see the Remain vote in the minority, as the Referendum Majority for the Borough was over 10,000.)
In the Daily Mail it is not stated how Survation arrived at the figures they claim for the fall in the number of Local Authorities backing Brexit, however the Referendum itself did not ask LAs their opinions, it was the Electorate who were asked, so LAs are irrelevant in this instance. Also where they state that “double-digit falls in support for Brexit” were recorded in Labour’s heartlands of Wigan*), Stoke-on-Trent**) & Middlesborough***) the figures themselves are not given so we don’t actually know whether support for Brexit in these areas is still in the majority, in which case there could be some dishonesty here.
(Note: *)Nearby Blackpool Leave Vote 67.457% – **)Stoke-on-Trent Leave Vote 69.362% – ***)Nearby Hartlepool Leave Vote 69.568%. )
In conclusion we are reminded that the handling of the Brexit negotiations by Theresa May has been nothing short of an absolute shambles, hardly surprising from a politician who is Pro-Remain and has a history of not delivering on her commitments.
Finally, Roger Arthur points out questions which ought to be asked of the electoral Commission but aren’t. He also provides links to various glaring errors in that Cameron/government propaganda booklet:
An Editorial in the DT highlights fundamental questions for the Electoral Commission. But surely they should also ask why the PM decided not to be impartial, as Harold Wilson did in 1975 and why Mr Cameron spent £9m of taxpayers money on a booklet to further his remain agenda?
Below are some serious errors and omissions in Mr Cameron’s booklet:
- It relied on snapshots rather than trends and it omitted to demonstrate the increasing trend in and potential for, exports to the rest of the world.
- The linking of 3m UK jobs to EU membership would have led many to conclude that most of those jobs would all be at risk, from a vote to leave.
- In implying that living costs would increase, due to Brexit, the leaflet omitted the reduction in the cost of imports from beyond the EU, outside of the customs union.
- By citing that the Services sector contributes 80% of UK GDP, the leaflet left voters to deduce that 80% of UK GDP would be at risk, from a vote to leave.
- The leaflet failed to mention the enormous cost of compliance with EU regulations, estimated at 7% of GDP in a 2005 Treasury report, equating to around £140bn pa.
- Perhaps most serious of all, the leaflet did not ask whether or not voters wanted ever closer union, when that will be unavoidable without binding treaty change.
Respectfully, Roger Arthur