Common sense views on politics & EU. #Brexit was inevitable.
Joined April 2015
- Tweets 82,565
- Following 11,020
- Followers 13,198
- Likes 22,963
1,216 Photos and videos
Pinned Tweet
4 Jun 2018
Just in case Remainers didn't know what type of Remain they were voting for.
Merkel - November 2012
The EU will transform into a single nation—a superstate—“otherwise it will not work in the long term”.
210
1,082
893
PoliticsSense retweeted
You can now read the Rape Gang Inquiry report on the link below.
static1.squarespace.com/stat…
From Scotland to London, children were raped, trafficked, tortured, and murdered.
Children as young as four years old were passed on and sold by their own mothers to men to be raped.
Children endured decades of trafficking, filmed blackmail, "red rooms" of torture, animal rape, and witnessed murders of other girls. They were subjected to extreme violence including penetration by objects, strangulation, and backstreet abortions.
Pure evil has been allowed to continue since as early as the 1950s. The majority of perpetrators were Muslim men, and the people paid to protect these children didn’t just turn a blind eye; some were directly involved in the abuse and rape.
As we head into Stage 3 of the inquiry, we will be naming those individuals involved and pursuing private prosecutions.
So far, the inquiry has held two weeks of hearings in London, initiated multiple criminal investigations, taken legal action against dozens of services, collected files and evidence, and continues to give survivors and families a platform.
Some survivors are still being ignored and waiting for investigations to open. The NCA have still not responded to us and the interest of the NPCC is to safeguard the people we intend to name.
I would like to thank MP Rupert Lowe for starting the inquiry, our team, all participants, the donors who made this possible, and, of course, the public for supporting us.
Our work is far from over.
254
2,993
8,054
233,996
PoliticsSense retweeted
The UK is now on the hook for a date.
Look out for the concessions to the EU that enable it to be met.
Some wishful thinking after Starmer met von der Leyen at the G7 today... 🤞
"The leaders agreed to press ahead with a UK-EU Summit on July 22 so that people on both sides could feel the benefits of UK-EU collaboration as soon as possible"
gov.uk/government/news/pm-me…
9
47
171
14,482
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 15
£5,778,570 from Buckinghamshire Council to one taxi firm in 2025, across 3,215 transactions.
That's an average of £1,797.38 per transaction.
And yet people are saying there is nothing wrong here.
According to its published payments, Buckinghamshire Council spent £39.9m on ‘Transport’ in 2025.
The top paid supplier was ‘Neale’s Taxis Ltd’, who received £5.78million over 3,215 transactions.
211
2,490
8,325
419,711
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 15
£1,164,119 taxpayer funding awarded to “Decolonising Justice: Vernacular Justice Cultures Beyond the Liberal Order” - taking place right now
22
299
876
17,765
PoliticsSense retweeted
Mar 17
So if Reeves’s claim that Brexit cost us 8% of GDP is correct it would mean we’d have grown four times more than Japan/Germany and almost twice France/Italy. Up there with Canada/US. If you believe that I have a bridge to sell you.
In reality, even with Brexit, we were fastest growing European economy in G7. Just a tad more than France (with no Frexit).
Mar 17
And here's headline GDP on the same basis (similar points apply)... 🤔
193
2,122
6,554
344,356
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 15
One uncomfortable consequence of political longevity is seeing the facts prove some of one's most confident forecasts wrong.
As the trade secretary overseeing Britain's entry into the single market in 1992, I claimed it would wonderfully boost our exports. As I outline in my new paper for Policy Exchange, I was proved wrong. Over our 28-year membership, British goods exports to the EU grew less than 1 per cent a year, while our exports to the 111 countries with which we had no trade deal grew four times as much – by 87 per cent.
Yet the present Business and Trade Secretary, Peter Kyle, is apparently ignorant of this disappointing experience. He has justified the government's proposed 'reset' of relations with the EU by claiming that ‘the single market is where the magic happens’.
✍️ Peter Lilley
Article | spectator.com/article/a-brex…
14
180
350
17,410
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 15
.@PeterStefanovi2 Lord Heseltine has been one of Britain's most committed europhiles for forty years, and he's spent the decade since the referendum trying to overturn its result. A man with that record doesn't get to declare the result a con and be treated as a neutral observer. He's a participant in this argument, not a judge of it.
But take the claim on its own terms. If Brexit has not delivered what people voted for, the question that follows is why. And the answer is not that people were sold a false prospectus. The answer is that the people charged with implementing the result, the civil service, the Treasury, much of the political and legal establishment Heseltine has belonged to his entire career, never accepted that result and built a settlement designed to dilute it. The Trade and Cooperation Agreement kept Britain tethered to EU regulatory standards through level playing field provisions. Britain became a rule taker rather than a rule maker. Northern Ireland ended up with an internal regulatory border that nobody voted for. That is not what Leave campaigners promised. It is what the people Heseltine represents delivered instead.
So if this is a con, identify the con artists correctly. It is not the fifty-two per cent who voted to leave. It is the establishment that spent the years since engineering a halfway house, then pointing at the halfway house as proof the whole project was fraudulent. Rachel Reeves told the Economist she wishes Britain had voted Remain. She is completing exactly the project Heseltine has spent a decade demanding. The con is still running and Heseltine is one of its longest serving operators.
As for heinous crime, that is the language of a man who has never accepted that seventeen million people might have had legitimate reasons for their vote and is still, a decade later, unable to process the fact that he lost.
"The con is still running and Heseltine is one of its longest serving operators."
43
152
382
6,258
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 14
One long and lazy series of #badbrexittakes from the Guardian, in chart form... 🙄
❌ No recognition that sterling was overvalued before the referendum - and already falling.
❌ No acknowledgement of the many flaws in the NBER's Brexit report - simply treated as gospel.
❌ Only a grudging nod to the fact that the UK's performance on global trade has been better than expected - which demolishes the OBR's assumptions.
❌No mention that UK business investment is recovering as the initial uncertainty has eased.
❌ Nothing on how support for rejoining the EU crumbles once voters are presented with the costs and conditions
And isn't it odd for the Guardian - presumably a supporter of free movement of people - to include a chart showing net immigration has surged as evidence of "how Brexit has made Britain poorer"? 🤔
theguardian.com/politics/202…
15
97
289
20,328
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
Waiting to board our flight in Washington and there are 3 Scotland fans in kilts walking past. An American lady says" I love your skirts"
"They're nae skirts lassie they're kilts , We're Scots not Trannies" I genuinely Lol #tartanarmy #fifaworldcup @jk_rowling
555
5,874
52,838
1,629,467
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 13
This is an important post, worth reading in full. The BBC would seem to have a death wish when it comes to impartiality.
Jun 12
The BBC Has Ruled. Brexit Damaged The Economy. No Further Debate Required.
The BBC's editorial complaints unit has decided that the negative economic impact of Brexit is now a settled fact. Not a contested judgement. Not one side of a live debate. A fact, in the same category as man-made climate change, requiring no balancing view.
The ruling followed a Radio 4 Today programme segment featuring Andrew Bailey, the Governor of the Bank of England, alongside Liam Byrne and Sir John Gieve, both long-standing advocates of closer EU alignment. All three agreed Brexit had damaged growth. The presenter, Katya Adler, did not challenge the premise or introduce a dissenting voice. A complaint followed.
The ECU's response is the revealing part. It acknowledged the segment failed to "acknowledge the alternative case" for pursuing opportunities outside the EU rather than realignment with it. That part of the complaint was upheld. But the central complaint, that three pro-EU voices agreeing with each other on air is not balance, was dismissed. The reasoning given was that this reflected "the consensus among economists" and there was no "significant body of economic opinion" on the other side.
This is worth pausing on. The BBC is not claiming it found balance. It is claiming balance was unnecessary because one side of the argument does not meaningfully exist. The institution that is legally required to be impartial has ruled itself the arbiter of which questions are still open and which are closed, and Brexit has just been moved into the closed file.
The economics itself does not support the certainty on display. The headline figure driving much of this narrative, an 8 per cent hit to GDP since 2016, comes from an NBER paper built on a "synthetic control" model that constructs a hypothetical non-Brexit Britain from a basket of comparator countries. The largest weighting in that basket, over 60 per cent, is the United States, a country currently riding an AI investment boom and a separate fiscal stimulus. The model also weights Estonia and Greece more heavily than France or Germany. On a straightforward per capita basis against France and Germany, the actual comparators, Britain's performance since 2016 sits roughly in line with both. An 8 per cent gap simply isn't visible. This is a model producing a number that then gets reported as "the consensus," which the BBC then cites as the reason no alternative view is required.
That loop, model produces number, number becomes consensus, consensus becomes fact, fact requires no balance, is the mechanism. It does not require a conspiracy. It requires an institution that has decided which conclusions are respectable and which are not, and which then treats its own prior decision as evidence.
The same posture has been on display all week. A government department can decide its diversity targets are lawful without seeking legal advice to check. A police force can decide a book about dismantling "inner white supremacy" is leadership training. A broadcaster can decide an economic question is closed and that deciding so does not breach its own impartiality rules. In each case, the institution marks its own homework, and the mark is always a pass.
None of this requires Brexit to have been a triumph. Britain's economy has genuine problems, most of them unrelated to single market membership. But a state broadcaster, funded by compulsory licence fee under threat of prosecution, has now formally placed one of the most consequential political decisions in modern British history beyond the reach of its own impartiality obligations. Reform's Lee Anderson called it being "blinkered by groupthink." The more precise description is an institution that has stopped being able to tell the difference between its own assumptions and the facts.
"The BBC is not claiming it found balance. It is claiming balance was unnecessary because one side of the argument does not meaningfully exist."
170
1,046
3,895
113,675
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 13
2
16
37
4,412
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 13
Barnaby Philip John Webber
11/01/2004-13/06/2023 💔
If you can, share these images of the beautiful soul stolen from us by the worst of humanity.
Let his face today burn bright.
Barney, I promise you there will be accountability 💛💚
For You. For Grace. For Ian.
742
7,479
24,670
901,146
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
David Lammy’s new diversity plan appears to be illegal.
He should publish his legal advice.
103
1,831
6,057
122,396
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
The Lord Chancellor's Department Just Published A Diversity Strategy. The Government's Own Guidance Says It's Unlawful.
David Lammy is the Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice. He is constitutionally responsible for the independence of the judiciary and the rule of law in England and Wales. On 11th June 2026 his department published its Public Appointments Diversity and Outreach Strategy. Nick Timothy MP has written to him asking him to publish the legal advice behind it. He should.
The strategy sets an expectation that at least 90 percent of campaigns achieve demonstrable diversity on sift and interview panels, with panel selection informed by the current diversity of the board and any representation gaps. A panel is considered diverse where data shows representation of more than one sex, or at least one declared ethnic minority or disabled panel member. Any exceptions require documented justification and quarterly senior oversight.
The Equality Act permits positive action only in narrow circumstances. It must address a documented disadvantage, different needs, or disproportionately low participation. The department's own figures show 57 percent of its 2024 to 2025 appointments were women. That is a majority, not underrepresentation. The 12 percent ethnic minority figure is compared against 17 percent of the economically active population, but that is not the correct benchmark. The correct benchmark is the pool of qualified candidates, not the population as a whole.
The Government's own Equalities Office guidance is explicit. Creating schemes to benefit those with a particular protected characteristic, without evidence that the group is at a disadvantage or has different needs, is listed as an example of unlawful discrimination. So is requiring places reserved for those with particular protected characteristics on interview panels. The Ministry of Justice strategy appears to do both.
This is not a new position for Lammy. In 2019 he hosted a Labour conference event with Shami Chakrabarti specifically advocating time limited quotas for judicial diversity. The Lord Chief Justice responded at the time that such quotas are not compatible with appointment on merit nor, ultimately, in sustaining public confidence in the judiciary. Lammy is now implementing from the office of Lord Chancellor a policy the most senior judge in the country said would undermine confidence in judicial independence.
The stated 2028 target is a measurable reduction in the representation gap for underrepresented groups, moving the appointee profile toward the diversity profile of the UK economically active population. That is not a description of merit based selection. It is a description of demographic engineering with a deadline.
This sits within the same DEI framework documented across British institutions this week. The Sussex Police book club on inner white supremacy. The NHS pressure not to section black patients. The Hampshire Race Action Plan. Each implements SDG 10.2 and 10.3, the United Nations Agenda 2030 commitments to inclusion and reduced inequalities of outcome, adopted by Britain in 2015 without a single vote. The Ministry of Justice strategy is that same architecture applied to the department responsible for the rule of law itself.
If the Lord Chancellor's own department believes its diversity quota is lawful, the legal advice supporting that view should be published. If no such advice exists, that is the more serious problem. Either way, the department charged with upholding the law owes the public an answer.
"Lammy is now implementing from the office of Lord Chancellor a policy the most senior judge in the country said would undermine confidence in judicial independence."
Jun 12
David Lammy’s new diversity plan appears to be illegal.
He should publish his legal advice.
28
376
694
17,903
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
The reason for a crime has no bearing on the outcome.
If you break in, smash the place up and attack the police with a sledgehammer it doesn't matter if you're Palestine Action attacking Elbit or the EDL attacking a mosque.
Jun 12
Gut wrenching to see four young people jailed for direct action against an arms supplier to Israel.
Years in prison for protesting to save lives in Gaza, with 'terrorism' used despite no jury convicting them of it.
A truly dangerous attack on the right to protest.
25
52
446
12,471
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
The BBC Has Ruled. Brexit Damaged The Economy. No Further Debate Required.
The BBC's editorial complaints unit has decided that the negative economic impact of Brexit is now a settled fact. Not a contested judgement. Not one side of a live debate. A fact, in the same category as man-made climate change, requiring no balancing view.
The ruling followed a Radio 4 Today programme segment featuring Andrew Bailey, the Governor of the Bank of England, alongside Liam Byrne and Sir John Gieve, both long-standing advocates of closer EU alignment. All three agreed Brexit had damaged growth. The presenter, Katya Adler, did not challenge the premise or introduce a dissenting voice. A complaint followed.
The ECU's response is the revealing part. It acknowledged the segment failed to "acknowledge the alternative case" for pursuing opportunities outside the EU rather than realignment with it. That part of the complaint was upheld. But the central complaint, that three pro-EU voices agreeing with each other on air is not balance, was dismissed. The reasoning given was that this reflected "the consensus among economists" and there was no "significant body of economic opinion" on the other side.
This is worth pausing on. The BBC is not claiming it found balance. It is claiming balance was unnecessary because one side of the argument does not meaningfully exist. The institution that is legally required to be impartial has ruled itself the arbiter of which questions are still open and which are closed, and Brexit has just been moved into the closed file.
The economics itself does not support the certainty on display. The headline figure driving much of this narrative, an 8 per cent hit to GDP since 2016, comes from an NBER paper built on a "synthetic control" model that constructs a hypothetical non-Brexit Britain from a basket of comparator countries. The largest weighting in that basket, over 60 per cent, is the United States, a country currently riding an AI investment boom and a separate fiscal stimulus. The model also weights Estonia and Greece more heavily than France or Germany. On a straightforward per capita basis against France and Germany, the actual comparators, Britain's performance since 2016 sits roughly in line with both. An 8 per cent gap simply isn't visible. This is a model producing a number that then gets reported as "the consensus," which the BBC then cites as the reason no alternative view is required.
That loop, model produces number, number becomes consensus, consensus becomes fact, fact requires no balance, is the mechanism. It does not require a conspiracy. It requires an institution that has decided which conclusions are respectable and which are not, and which then treats its own prior decision as evidence.
The same posture has been on display all week. A government department can decide its diversity targets are lawful without seeking legal advice to check. A police force can decide a book about dismantling "inner white supremacy" is leadership training. A broadcaster can decide an economic question is closed and that deciding so does not breach its own impartiality rules. In each case, the institution marks its own homework, and the mark is always a pass.
None of this requires Brexit to have been a triumph. Britain's economy has genuine problems, most of them unrelated to single market membership. But a state broadcaster, funded by compulsory licence fee under threat of prosecution, has now formally placed one of the most consequential political decisions in modern British history beyond the reach of its own impartiality obligations. Reform's Lee Anderson called it being "blinkered by groupthink." The more precise description is an institution that has stopped being able to tell the difference between its own assumptions and the facts.
"The BBC is not claiming it found balance. It is claiming balance was unnecessary because one side of the argument does not meaningfully exist."
176
594
1,761
146,823
PoliticsSense retweeted
Keir Starmer during the riots (1st August) in Southport:
‘A gang of thugs got on trains and buses, went to a community not their own… and proceeded to throw bricks…’
The findings of the inquiry:
‘We found NO conclusive or compelling evidence that the 2024 disorder was…coordinated…Most people who took part…lived locally’
I trust Keir Starmer would have Keir Starmer sanctioned, arrested and jailed for spreading misinformation during a period of public unrest?
Remember, @Keir_Starmer who wants to ban X for spreading misinformation has been community noted 27 times for lying.
32
1,102
2,980
52,637
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
Every single person who still cringes at the memory of trying to bullshit their way through an interview or exam question: today, the slate is wiped clean. Set down your burden of shame. Nothing - nothing, I say - could touch this.
3,553
11,775
74,027
3,085,075
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
An appalling account from @KathrynPorter26 .
In civilised countries people don't lie in a car park in agony for 7 hours waiting for an ambulance.
"Our NHS" generates endless such horror stories. It needs radical reform. Will any political party ever take this up?
Jun 11
This really worries me
A month ago in Wales I suffered a ruptured aneurysm in my abdomen. I lost over 2 units of blood
But the Welsh ambulance service refused to send an ambulance. I was still breathing so apparently didn't need one
I spent 7 hours lying on the ground in a car park. Every time I moved I threw up from the pain. The owners of the car park called 999 6x
One of the people there was a fireman. He couldn't believe that 999 treated each call as a separate incident and couldn't see the details or link to previous calls. He was frustrated because they could see I was seriously ill but you can't see internal bleeding and so there was no way to persuade 999 that it actually was an emergency
Eventually my husband arrived by taxi, journey of more than 3 hours from our home
He gave me my pain meds (the car park people were worried about liability and I was too ill to get them myself). This meant I was able to crawl into the car and he drove me to A&E
He got me into a wheelchair. We waited 75 minutes to see a doctor. I was shivering, heaped with blankets and threw up all over the floor
As soon as a doctor looked at me I was taken straight to resus. The next day I was transfered by blue light ambulance to another hospital, had a blood transfusion and spent 5 days on the high dependency unit
If my husband hadn't been able to come and look after me I have no idea how I would have survived. As it was I nearly didn't
I would not have been able to get myself to hospital nor would I have been able to log into some digital triage system
This scheme seems to assume if you're seriously ill you'll arrive by ambulance and if not you're well enough to navigate a digital portal
My experience suggests that's a dangerous assumption
A week later, back home in England I had another ruptured aneurysm. This time an ambulance came in 2 hours and again I was taken straight to resus
It wasn't the same because I had a recent diagnosis of a ruptured aneurysm so we could tell 999 I was almost certainly bleeding internally. But I was too ill to get myself down the stairs and out to the car. We still needed that ambulance and I still wouldn't have been able to fiddle around with an ipad
Proper triage REQUIRES an actual doctor to look at the patient. It takes a matter of minutes to differentiate between a life threatening emergency and not a life threatening emergency. That's not minutes to get a diagnosis but to know that the person is stable or not stable and if not that needs immediate attention
Seriously ill people can't do it themselves. It doesn't matter how smart or articulate they are normally. Or how tough. Expecting people to manage their own emergency care isn't what a modern health service should do
telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/06…
62
331
1,582
34,162
PoliticsSense retweeted
Jun 12
First they came for our heated towel rails….
More madness from Miliband..
Ed comes for underfloor heating in net zero drive telegraph.co.uk/money/net-ze…
455
671
2,764
277,982