Theresa May seeks Brexit extension |

Theresa May seeks Brexit extension

As predicted by so many, the UK prime minister has asked for a Brexit extension until June 30, while assuring the EU Britain will not be voting in the coming European elections.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at

With an extension request on the table Britain appears to be totally unable to resolve its Brexit impasse.

Or, more to the point, the childish squabblers and point scorers within Westminster seem loathe to reach a sensible solution to this problem which like it or not is solely of their making.

Before I proceed any further I hasten to state that I have no axe to grind on either side of this ‘political’ debacle – I am more at home with, and comforted by, the more logical mathematical land of probability and certainty.

Nonetheless, what I have observed over time is that most MPs, of all shades, suffer from over-inflated egos. Apart from the few true idealists, who soon fall by the wayside, in the main they go into public office to be seen, to be heard, to pontificate and to tell others what to do and to fulfil their own interests.

Inevitably we witness that MPs will resolutely not do what their constituents wish unless such a wish or viewpoint gels with that of their own.

The Referendum is a perfect example; almost two thirds of the constituencies, not total country-wide votes, supported Brexit.

17.4 million people voted Leave and about the 16.2 million voted Remain. That majority was 1,269,501 people, around 20% larger than the population of Birmingham, the UK’s second largest city.

On that basis alone, any half-intelligent impartial being from another planet who just happened to be passing by, would have has a reasonable expectation that Brexit should easily pass the Commons vote as the MPs follow the expressed wishes of their constituents.

However, as we know that has not been the case - the aliens would have been sorely disappointed.

A quote from Emma Goldman, a Russian anarchist, political activist and writer, springs to mind and seems oddly appropriate wherein she stated “If voting changed anything, they wouldn’t let us do it.”

You may recall that at the time of the Referendum the bookmakers were offering odds on a 55% Remain and 45% Leave vote result as also all the major polls at the time were predicting a Remain victory – possibly an influence on Cameron proceeding?

Yet here we are, just two days to go until the original ‘deadline’ set by the referendum back in June 2016 giving some truth to Goldman’s quote being very much the case.

With all the talk of, and calls for, a second Referendum why should anyone respect another vote if the result of the first is deemed unacceptable? Will we then hear, and concede, to cries for a third if that does not produce the Westminster-desired result? Then a fourth and so on ad infinitum?

Many could be forgiven for considering that the UK Parliament is no longer fit for purpose and there being a high probability that Guy Fawkes was a man thinking well ahead of his time :wink: