At the end of several years of Matters Blog, it’s time for a review. As complex as life is, my aim is to express opinions based on common sense rather than personal or political bias. Not only that, but to suggest original and innovative solutions many of which have not been taken from the public domain.
The famous Dunning Kruger Effect states that amateur pundits have a false self image of themselves as knowing it all, while experts constantly doubt. So how did I do?
In 06 August 2018 I identified the shortage of affordable housing in the United Kingdom as a problem and offered a solution. My suggestion was that houseboats are moored on the UK’s inland waterways, rivers and lakes. They avoid the purchase of land and as temporary structures can be removed or replaced as needed. They can be built more quickly than a house and provided in enough numbers would create a stop gap whilst houses are built. The housing crisis had not been addressed by the previous government and the new government is intent on more building houses even though there are not the tradesmen to do it.
In 31 July 2021 the blog ‘HS2 Where?’ listed twenty reasons, including cost, on why the proposed high speed train route between London and Northern cities in England was doomed to failure. In 2024 the Conservative government reduced it’s reach to just Birmingham on the grounds of cost.
In 09 February 2019 I wrote a questionnaire for people who voted for Brexit. Apparently they were insulted at the suggestion they did not understand the consequences of Brexit. The questionnaire was intended to highlight the multi level complexity of the process and predictable effects of the UK leaving the European Union. When Brexiteers are asked today what the benefits of Brexit have been, few list any precise benefit. They say they no longer have to obey EU law and have gained ‘Sovereignty’. Ask how this has affected their lives and they will struggle to give an example.
In my blogs ‘Let Me In’ parts one and two in June 2022 and ‘Head for the Hills’ in December 2022, I examined immigration into the UK via unsuitable boats. The last Tory government made this problem a priority but chose a non-viable solution in an expensive plan to send unsuccessful asylum seekers to Rwanda. The slogan of intention missed out the detail of ‘how to stop the boats’ while their policy probably did the opposite. My suggestions included allowing asylum applications to be made from anywhere in the world to anywhere in the world. That hasn’t happened but the new Labour government have pledged to close down the people trafficking gangs which I also had suggested was long overdue.
In 22 October 2023, I published a blog I had written a week earlier following the attack on Israeli defence forces and civilians by Hammas titled Shalom, Salaam, Peace. I suggested that Hammas, as the vastly inferior force to the IDF, had no means to destroy Israel and were instead baiting Israel to over react to attack. Any ‘destruction of Israel’ would be done by the other Arab nations in defence of the people of Gaza, such as Iran. Since then the Iran backed Houthis in Yemen have taken up this role and significant others. I suggested an Arab leader would appear to take on Israel which has not yet happened.
In 20 February 2023 I wrote a parable called The Holy Forest about the politics of the Holy Land and how Israel will one day realise why people resent and hate the actions of successive Israeli Zionist Governments. I further commented on a better solution to bombing in Gaza as being the use of a multinational force of Special Forces to clear Hammas out of Gaza in my blog War Without End in October 24. To date the tactics of the Israeli Zionist government have not changed or met their stated aims of saving the hostages and destroying Hammas. I called out the genocide of the Palestinian early on in the process and qouted the Israeli post WW2 mantra of ‘Never Again’.
These and other blogs allowed me as an observer to suggest descriptions of complexity and apply problem solving techniques without using the techniques of over simplification, project fear and the illusionist’s destraction.
So thank you to those who click the ‘like’ button and may 2025 give us all hope my observations will become shorter and shorter as those in charge of us work smarter and harder for the benefit of those they serve.
Ms. Smith stands before her Primary School class in an English State school on a very special day.
picture credit: Mathematics Mastery
“Good morning boys and girls! Now quiet please. Quiet. That’s better.
This morning we have a very special visitor who is going to listen to what WE think. This is instead of Nature Table which we will do tomorrow. No Peter, it is fair because the nature table with still be there tomorrow and the Prime Minister will not.
So I want you to welcome the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Mr Boris Johnson. Yes, you can clap if you want to children. Oh, you don’t want to, alright.
Mr. Johnson, you asked to listen to the adults of the future. Well here they are!”
“Wha, Wha, Wha, good morning Ms. Smith and good morrow boys and girls. I am really really interested in what you think about stuff.”
“Jimmy, why is your hand up?”
“What’s this bloke mean stuff Miss?”
“Ah! wwwwwell that’s a good question. You see being vague is a great way not to be specific but, but, but I see that may work in the House but not here. So I shall focus, robustly. Firstly, we have left that great monster known as the European Union in which you would have found opportunities for travel, education and work. So I want to know – from YOUR happy faces – what opportunities you believe have opened up for your futures, from Independence.’
A small girl waves a hand energetically.
‘My Dad says the UK has its sovereignty back but I cannot see that the UK has ever lost it’s sovereignty. Surely sovereignty is really Nationalism made to sound more respectable, is it not? No, don’t interrupt please Prime Minister that was a rhetorical question. Look at the evidence. What is the national flag of the United Kingdom? The Union flag, of course, not the EU flag. What is the currency of the United Kingdom? The pound, not the Euro. When we go on holiday, all the European cars have registration plates from their own countries, not European plates. Cars are insured in their home countries and are inspected annually in their home countries, and taxed in their home countries. The rules of the road are set nationally – we drive on the right, Europe on the left. It is true that passports were standardised by Europe but that streamlines free movement of people and increases border security. If you want another coloured cover with the UK crest on, you can buy one. There is no ‘identity card’ in the UK whereas most EU countries have one. All countries do things differently. Nationalism in Europe is alive and well, in my view.’
‘Thank you Marlene, that was very interesting wasn’t it Prime Minister?’
‘Bah bah, yes, bah, factually correct but my point is, dah, wouldn’t it be nice not to have to buy a new passport cover. £4 in Smith’s mine was. Many households cannot afford that.’
A small boy next to the water cooler stands up to speak.
‘I would like to bring up the subject of free trade. If the Germans sell cars to China within the EU rules, why can’t we? The EU has spent decades agreeing trade deals from the strong negotiating position that politically aligned block commands. These trade deals are largely responsible for making the UK wealthy and in a position to share it’s wealth and know how. The latest trade deal with South America is something the UK is now going to miss out on. By leaving the EU we will lose the benefits of hundreds of good trade deals all over the world and replace them with fewer deals on similar or worse terms. The new deal with the Japanese is an example. We already traded with Japan from within Europe. This new ‘deal’ greatly favours the Japanese. Individual trading countries like the UK’s now is, never negotiate from a position of strength.’
‘That is most interesting Nigel, wasn’t it Mr Johnson? I see you are speechless. So, Penny you have your hand up dear?’
‘I want to say that I want to work in Europe when I grow up.
Now if I even want to search for a job in France, I will not be allowed to for more than three months without returning to England, I will need medical insurance, will have to pay to exchange my money into euros and back again, pay high charges to phone my parents a few hundred miles away and my UK qualifications will not be considered valid. Am I destined to stack supermarket shelves in Calais?’
‘Wow, wow, wargh…just get a job in Blighty little girl. They speak English here!’
‘As do most Europeans. It’s a universal second language in Europe, excepting Estonia, Latvia and England, Dumbo.’
‘Penny, politeness is a classroom rule, please.
Ms. Smith moves on the questioning. ‘Can I ask you a question Prime Minister which is about taxation, health care, service industries, the Royal Family, national and European security, policing, defence, foreign aid, research and projects all of which are governed in law at a general level, by Westminster. What is left that is governed by Brussels?’
‘Are well, Brussels, ugh, is at the root of the problem because our views are not represented there…’
Bobby by the fish tank piped up. ‘Not true! What are MEP’s for if not to represent the UK? Why has the UK agreed to 95% of new European laws if it didn’t agree with them? I want to play with toys that are safe because EU law has made them safe. Not some dangerous toy from a third world factory.’
Another child stands up and leans forward taking an aggresive debating stance, ‘Yes, and I want my human rights protected by the European Court of Human Rights, not by a national government of any political persuasion!’
‘…werg, werg, what what I mean is that some of our laws are made in Brussels and some of those are very bad for us indeed. Very bad.’
Girl with plaits in the second row. ‘Which laws?’
‘Erg well, let me see, the Common Agricultural Policy for instance hands out money to farmers for nothing. We want to pay farmers for looking after birds and bees. Isn’t that what you want for your futures?’
‘Modern industrial farming methods have driven the wildlife to the edges of extinction not by European law. Organic, sustainable farming costs less than fertiliser guzzling intensive farms. Coupled with the public’s expectation of cheap food, as is the American farming model and you have a perfect storm against the environment. We don’t need laws, we need farmers with who produce food ethically and affordably.
Johnson points a finger meaninglessly and retorts, ‘Ah, yes, well what does the apple in your lunch box cost little boy? Eh?’
‘It costs the lives of fewer bees because the EU has banned the pesticides that kill bees and other insects. Without EU laws which protect the environment our futures would be bleak – factory farmed food from the USA will flood domestic markets. Lamb producers in the Welsh mountains will be priced out of business. Where is the independence in that?’
‘Yes, yes, yes, well since you like farming young man you can get a job as a picker all over the UK, anywhere you want because there will be no Europeans in our fields picking.’
The young child is not convinced. ‘Picking is seasonal and the climate in the UK means one must travel south in the winter for work. To move around the EU freely without borders.’
A tall and slim girl who until now has been looking out of the window raises and arm, stands and begins…
‘Prime Minister. There are clearly many areas where the UK is now going to struggle without the benefits of close partnership with it’s nearest neighbours. Australia for instance looks to the Pacific Rim countries for it’s trade and service industries. Historically the old Commonwealth loyalties went out of the window when the UK joined the EEC. That was a strategic decision made then and we cannot call upon ‘loyalty to the Empire or Commonwealth any longer’. The UK like Spain and Japan and many other European countries have moved on from the values of Empire for realistic, modern ethical reasons. Empire for the UK was an episode of shame. If we now claim to value sovereignty, we have to show respect for the sovereignty of other countries. Take Scotland, Ireland and Wales as an example. If we follow your argument to ‘take back control’, is this not a green flag for the break up of the United Kingdom?’
‘Bbbbblimey. How old are you?’
‘Please answer my question.’
‘Well of course not, we are a Unionist party and we want the United Kingdom to stay firmly together as one great nation. We shall do this by not allowing the Scottish people to have a referendum on their future. That’s the Scots out of the way. What’s the other place? Ah! Wales, well, we still have lots of castles in Wales don’t we, hah, hah! Joke! Just kidding! Wales voted to remain in the United Kingdom, I mean in the European Union so yes, we might expect trouble there but nothing I cannot overrule. And then there is the thorny question of Northern Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement that those Yanky Doodles seem to take a high moral stand about. Well, I think my brilliant idea of an underwater border making Northern Ireland AS IF it was part of the EU should not be taken as an indication it should join it’s friends, family, partners and Unionists IN Europe. Union of an island is not a good idea…when it’s Ireland you are talking about, I mean…not us.’
As if he was wondering what he had just said, the PM pauses, then restarts as if inspired,
‘…and unless you are talking about uniting a continent…whereas union of our island of Britain is because our passports are now blue and we intend to remain blue and British…with Northern Ireland that is, unless they vote otherwise…’
The Prime Minister turns to Ms. Smith and hisses in her ear not very discretely…’vargh, it’s so unfair these children asking difficult questions. You told me it would be easy, I came unprepared. Eton is not all it’s cracked up to be you know, just because I sound posh doesn’t mean I know what I am talking about. It’s not like State schools where there is a common aim of high academic standards and creating descent human beings. No, I mean I was bbbbullied you know and that Latin teacher… I mean horrible things went on…’
He is interupted by a boy bouncing eagerly on his seat and waving his arm in the air.
‘Miss, miss, miss can I ask a question about border control and how countries only control their borders in one direction and how Eire may make their UK border harder, undermining the Good Friday Agreement?’
‘No, Simon I am afraid we would love to ask that question but we are out of time and the Prime Minister is a busy man.’
‘Thank you children for this morning. Just remember that channel tunnel links us with the whole of Europe and beyond, as does Dover, so we are not going to forget our friends over there.’
‘And the channel tunnel links the whole of Europe and beyond with four small countries, who cannot agree…’ piped in Simon.
The PM stood up uncomfortably from his rather small chair and turned eagerly to Ms. Smith as she gestured him to step out of the room first.
‘What’s for lunch then Ms. Smith? Fish? Thank heavens we didn’t get any questions about fish eh! (laughs) Especially since UK cod comes from Greenland and Norway. I bet they would have known that, and that herring and lobster and scallops that we fish, are mostly sold to Europe. My they are well informed your children, at least we got education right. Is it this way? I shall just follow my nose. Bah!
Only a vain fool would want to be prime minister of the United Kingdom today. Teresa May was greatly flattered when she was asked to take the poisoned chalice of leadership. Today, 22 July 19 is her last day of holding that chalice.
There was little democracy in the process of electing the new prime minister of the United Kingdom today. Only members of the conservative party were eligible to vote – almost 160,000 of them which is just 0.000625% of the population of the United Kingdom. This process was preferred to a general election for what reason? Could there have been a fear of losing the majority of two seats in the House of Commons and therefore power?
This absence of a sizeable working majority, an apparent inability to consult with like minded partners and her private belief in ‘remaining’, was what ultimately brought down Teresa May, as I see it.
So having decided that the country has no right to choose their next prime minister, ‘they’ decided to pitch a ‘remainder’ against a ‘leaver’ as candidates to – well – leave. Which one do you think was expected…no…intended to win? Yes, the leave campaigner was always going to win.
Unfortunately for Boris Johnson, he will have to act out his dreams of being a right honourable politician whilst facing an impossible situation. It’s like arriving at five in the morning at the Glastonbury music festival after an all night concert in which all the bands were booed off stage. Only a single cleaner is to be seen sweeping up debris from the back of the stage.
Come on Boris, get your ukulele out and give us a number!
shouts someone from the crowd. They are not quite sure how he got there but they are willing to sit through one more act before the stage is dismantled.
Vanity makes you so thick skinned you find yourself being handed a battered ukulele (called the Withdrawal Agreement) and tuning it’s three remaining strings. You can now say you have been in a band at Glastonbury 2019, when your grand kids ask you Boris.
But he is not so poor a politician that he has forgotten to organise a bus to take him home. It sits at the back of the stage with the engine just ticking over. The driver leans against an open door dragging on cigarette. This bus has written on the side; ‘no deal’.
Many politicians cringe at the thought of a ‘no deal’ with the danger of a catalogue of unintended consequences emerging from it like the Monty Python one ton weight descending from above. The EU commissioners are expecting the £39 billion pound debt to be paid by the United Kingdom. Failure to do this would leave the UK’s reputation as an honourable nation in tatters, the pound would crash and investors rush to remove capital and businesses from the nation.
Yet Boris has cleverly wrapped up this ‘no deal’ option in a transparent tissue of lies paper. ‘This is on the table so that we have bargaining power’ the public are told. But of course the mere presence of this option means that there would be no deceit if it were decided to be used. After all, the problems faced by Boris Johnson are so unmanageable that ‘throwing the baby out with the bath water’ is an appealing Party ploy.
And when the unexpected consequences start appearing one by one, he can say that none of this was his fault. Third parties such as the EU commissioners and Teresa May and all the other political parties, were the cause of the chaos now falling from the skies.
One such cloud burst, in my view, will inevitably be the countries that make up the United Kingdom seeking independence. I expect Northern Ireland to vote to become part of Eire (and Europe) first. That will pave the way for Scotland to seek independence and perhaps even the north of England!
Boris will be like the male lead in a farce that ends with his trousers around his ankles and a chicken on his head – but then – I expect he would rather like that look.
I am disheartened when I listen to people asked for their views on Brexit on TV. They expect there to be some sort of change after Brexit but rarely state what that might be. The ‘end game’ is lost in the excitement of the ‘present game’.
I am reminded of the ‘independence’ parties held in countries in Africa as the colonial powers withdrew in the 1950’s. The national exuberance and excitement lasted several days. New national flags were flown from windows and vehicles, horns blaring. People danced in the streets all because they were ‘free’ without pausing to think what that meant.
I make no excuse for colonialism which was clearly wrong. But when the European countries left Africa there was a political vacuum. Despots and power hungry ‘leaders’ filled the parliaments and military top jobs. Corruption and victimisation of populations became normal. People found the end game was no better than before – sometimes worse.
I wonder what will be the ‘end game’ for Brexit, once the bunting has been taken down from the streets parties.
Nigel Farage will disappear from the scene because his great ‘oversimplification of the facts’ will be over.
All that will be left will be a resounding silence, little direction in the shape of cleverly managed new prospects.
The EU will treat the UK as positively second class; why shouldn’t they? And America will not save the UK from nasty Europe this time round – unless you think President Trump is a very very good person… very loyal and trustworthy person who loves British Trump…Boris Gump.
The British Raj in India was a colossal enterprise, whatever your views on its moral worth. It was set up in 1858 and ended in 1947, lasting almost one hundred years. The creation of the instruments of power and their administration were not simple. They were accompanied over time by the development of education, public health, railways, missions, industry, irrigation and other essential aspects of the colonisation.
The point of interest is the time which this took to establish. To say that it took almost one hundred years would not be an exaggeration. In effect, at the time of the rebellion and the handing back of rule, the process has continued as self rule took control, and continues to do so.
Vast undertakings take vast amounts of time at huge environmental, economic and social costs. The concept of colonisation was not new and had been exercised in many parts of Africa by the British before – so they knew the complexity involved.
Complexity always adds time to tasks whether political or such things as domestic repairs. At a certain point in home DIY for instance, you realise that you don’t know what you are doing or don’t have the skills and ring a professional trades person. The reason is that one person cannot know everything.
So when faced with the intention of a task, it is important to estimate how long it will take. Will it be completed this afternoon or in an hundred years?
Reluctantly – we should apply this understanding to the process of ‘Brexit’.
The initiation and development of the European Union goes back to the 1951 Treaty of Paris and the 1957 Treaty of Rome (although it could be argued that both Napoleon Bonaparte, Adolph Hitler and before them ‘Rome in the West‘ – sought to do the same by means of force rather than persuasion).
The institutions of the Union have themselves developed beyond their original aims of economic unity. The process to the present day has been complex and now involves over half a billion citizens.
It should not be expected to be unreasonable therefore that the process of leaving such an organisation is equally complex. What might be expected?
Rules of leaving as agreed when joining.
The Penalties for leaving as agreed when joining.
The Process of leaving as agreed when joining.
The preparation and planning, instigation, monitoring and completion of leaving.
Which leads to the question, ‘how long is this going to take?’
There appears to have been insufficient consideration during the formation of the European Union, to the process leaving the Union. It was after all, set up in the way of many religions, to attract new members. The unthinkable process of losing members is naturally inclined to become ‘unthinkable’.
The managerial notion of ‘we’ll deal with that at the time’ or ‘a dynamic assessment’ is not a good one when applied to organisations of this size and complexity.
Ordinary citizens can be forgiven for buying into such inane over simplifications as ‘Brexit means Brexit’. In the present western cultures where the idea of the expert is ridiculed and ordinary citizens believe themselves able to understand what they do not understand, a simple question like ‘do you want to leave the European Union‘ is not challenged as in itself, absurd.
Supported by the idea that ‘Britain once ruled over one quarter of the world’ – megalomania takes hold. The simpler the chants of those wishing to ignore complexity, the more supporters rally round.
If the problem was considered in the manner that civil servants are empowered to do, then almost certain more caution would be applied.
What is the aim?
What is already in place to achieve it?
What extra measures are needed to achieve it?
How long will it take to achieve it?
When will we know that the aim is accomplished?
These questions are the roots supporting the tree and like all roots, they extend in directions and distances unknown.
Suffice to say the withdrawal of any state from the European Union requires considerable planning and resources. The planning stage should start at the inception of the Union and be part of the conditions of joining – in order to simplify subsequent negotiations.
Any problems, such as politically sensitive borders, should be required to be solved prior to the start of leaving.
The process of leaving should be phased rather than all aspects negotiated and initiated ‘with immediate effect’.
The phases should be given generous time periods. The spectacle of the United Kingdom repeatedly applying for ‘extensions of time’ merely to start the withdrawal process is not something a manager of even a small company or organisation would be comfortable with.
Each phase would encompass one aspect of being a member of the European Union. In this way, proper consideration of the details of the present and proposed arrangements would be given.
Lessons should be learnt from the withdrawal of the European States from their colonies in Africa. Books could be written on this subject but in essence, there were problems created by the ‘political vacuum’ left after the transfers of power. These problems continue as symptoms at least, to the present day.
In my own way, I return to the reality that humans tend to become victims of their thoughts, rather than the masters.
It is possible to consider the absurd, and not realise that the matter is downright impossible to solve. Thinking itself is an inaccurate process, challenged continually by evidence from ‘the ground’.
So my own view of the process of leaving the European Union would be the phase each aspect and form consensus on this process based on the details of each phase.
To think that the process is simple and can be initiated at the stroke of a pen, has been done before. History as always is our teacher when this has happened.
‘Today is the day we hold an historic meaningless vote. Two years ago I went over to the continent and told them what the terms of Brexit would be. At first the EU didn’t like my ‘red line’ attitude but after constant repetition they finally agreed; if only to shut me up (laughs self consciously).
Because no one knew what they had voted for when they voted to leave the EU, I have had to make up the terms of my meaningless Withdrawal Agreement. It’s so fraught with problems that I have had to paint parliament into a corner to get them to vote for it. This hasn’t worked so far but by constantly delaying parliamentary procedure, we are now where I want us to be – at the edge of the abyss.
So today you will all be voting for my deal…as they say on that interesting show Meaningless on tea time telly, ‘a very very good deal indeed‘. You all know the terms by now, as you have voted against them enough times. But as the alternative is falling off the cliff edge, I expect more of you will see that my Brexit is the only way forward.
‘What about a people’s vote?!’
‘I don’t know why I have to explain again but we have had the referendum ages ago. The people voted to leave. It is my mission to give the people what they want, even if the terms and conditions were not considered and differ enormously from what people expected. But remember, we can’t just keep going back to the people asking the same question until we get the answer we want.’
‘That’s exactly what you are doing with your meaningless vote!’
‘Yes, but I am Prime Minister and I can do whatever I want. And I have told, I mean, agreed with the EU negotiators that every member of this house will strip naked, paint ourselves blue and dance around Parliament Square singing Britain Waves the Rules! That is a much better deal than staying the EU.’
‘No it’s not!’
‘Who said that?’
‘I did.’
‘See me afterwards.’
‘What about all the people who didn’t vote in the first referendum, who want to be heard now?’
‘If you mean women in refugee camps; – we have stripped her of her citizenship, so no longer a problem.’
‘No, I mean the two million sixteen year olds in 2016, who are now eighteen. It’s their future and they have a right to be heard. And then there are the UK citizens who live in Europe and were not allowed to vote on the grounds that this doesn’t concern them because they have lived out the UK for 15 years. Of course it concerns them…them more than anyone else!’
‘A second referendum will bring indecision and divisiveness.’
‘We have indecision and divisiveness now! Surely a second vote will either stop Brexit or give it more impetus and quieten dissenters.’
‘My deal is a very good deal and if you don’t agree to it then you are not being democratic and defending the rule of law and parliament…’
‘Why?’
‘Because I say so, because I am Prime Minister. So are we going to have this meaningless vote or not? Let’s get it over and this time, remember, if you don’t vote for my meaningless deal then you will have to keep voting until you vote in it’s favour.
If you vote for the good of the country instead of my meaningless deal, the repercussions will not be my fault but yours for being very naughty MP’s.
No indecision. Commit yourselves to be stupid and support the most uninformed plan anyone has ever concocted. You must vote and you must vote decisively, May. You may not vote ‘may not’ or wait until May.
Let’s be certain about one thing. I used to tell my teachers at school uncertainty, is not my middle name, it’s my last name.
Matters Blog 