Tag Archives: eu

Theresa May’s “resignation” and the dreaded “compromise”.

So our Prime Minister has finally announced her resignation and yes I’m glad. But do I feel any empathy for her? Do I feel any sympathy for her? Well, yes and no really.

I do empathise with her situation, she had a difficult job to do. It was never going to be easy with the EU’s bullying tactics and their desire to “make an example of the United Kingdom” so no other state would want to leave the EU. However, her “error” (in my eyes) was revealed glaringly in her resignation speech when she uttered that one word …. You know the one: “compromise” and that has been her downfall all along.

When the United Kingdom runs an election (or indeed in this scenario a referendum) there is a clear “winner”. This is because the United Kingdom is a democratic state and as such referendums and elections are held when deemed necessary to “listen” and enact the “vox populi” (voice of the people). Now obviously a democratic government can’t have a referendum on every single aspect of the state’s “running” so we have a system whereby we elect a political party that best represents what we stand for to enact the running of the state as they see fit, in the United Kingdom’s case: according to their manifesto (snigger). However, big “important” stuff we have a referendum and so we should; you know, stuff like “leaving the EU yes/no”. It’s not rocket science after all?

Therein lies the problem. Theresa May has been trying to “compromise”, she’s tried to keep leave (52%) happy and she’s tried to keep remain (48%) happy. This is instead of thinking “ok 52% is bigger than 48% so let’s go with that because it’s a majority”. Oh no, instead she’s tried to keep everybody happy and in the process annoyed virtually everybody. You can’t have a compromise in these scenarios and that’s where the state is going wrong. Leave won so just LEAVE. And what does Theresa May waffle on about in her resignation speech? “Compromise” …. Sigh.

I do sympathise with her, I know it’s not easy but that comes with the job. If you don’t want “grief”, if you don’t want “difficulty”, if you don’t want “abuse” then my advice is “don’t become a Public Servant”, because (let’s not forget this, it’s important) that’s what an MP (especially the Prime Minster) is, a PUBLIC SERVANT. Elected by the people to do a job, an MP is still, at the end of the day, a Public Servant.

Yes I feel some sympathy, it’d be heartless not to feel a little twinge of sympathy for her but it’s over now and like I say that’s the price you pay for that job, be it right or wrong you’re going to get grief.

I just hope now we can move on, a Brexiteer MP will become Prime Minster and does what Theresa May should have done and showed some backbone when dealing with the Eurocrats instead of basically rolling over and surrendering. Make no mistake, that’s what Theresa May’s Withdrawal Agreement Bill was: a surrender treaty. It certainly wasn’t a “deal”.

Steve

“But muh deal” & The Theresa May Conspiracy Theory

First up I have to tell you I am no conspiracy theorist. I have no patience with the idea of chemtrails, CIA/SIS (MI6) mind control or manipulating the weather via HAARP etc. The idea that a state government could organise a social engineering program on its populace is often ludicrous, simply because most of them couldn’t organise a booze-up in an off licence (liquor store if you’re not British). Let’s face it, if government was competent then we’d really be in the crap right?

Anyway, enough of the disclaiming (is that a real word?) and on to my “point”. Our illustrious political leader (snigger) has “negotiated” a deal with the behemoth that is the European Union and, to be frank, it’s a “well polished pile of you know what”, well in my opinion at least. So I put forward to you two possible “perspectives”:

  • The Prime Minister has done a superb job and considering the complexities of Brexit etc the deal is well done and about as “good as it’s going to get”. Ergo, we should applaud her wondrous diplomatic negotiations and get behind her and so on.

Now like I said above I am no conspiracy theorist but let’s consider the following:

  • The Prime Minister doesn’t really care about the whole thing because she’s the fall guy. She’s been an MP for several years but never really “shined” or been put forward for “greater things”, as her time as in the Home Office indicates.
  • She’s coming up for retirement age and she was “put forward” (with other candidates standing aside one at a time, Andrea Leadsom etc) for Prime Minister with the intention of wrecking the negotiation, because the government wants us to stay in the EU.
  • It wrecks her career essentially but she’s over 60, up for retirement and so on. As a former Prime Minister she’ll get a yearly allowance of £148,500 per annum and a £65,000 pension per annum (no state pension £120 a week here); she’s probably been offered a peerage; and also her husband is a multi-millionaire. All this money is worth wrecking your career over, heck most of us would gladly wreck their career for that sort of income !
  • As my friend (who inspired this post) also pointed out: This is why she’s “thick skinned” about the whole business, it makes no odds to her because she’s far better off AFTER the whole business when she can retire, probably prompted by some sort of health scare (possibly diabetes related).

You know what? Conspiracy theorist or not the second scenario sounds far too plausible.

Steve