Time is running out to prove Brexit is not a historic failure

The above headline was from that left wing rag, the Daily Torygraph. The story is behind a paywall, so I don't know what it went on to say, or whether it identified what could be done from averting the precious Brexit from historic failure.

Of course it depends on your definition of "historic failure", but I would argue Brexit has already qualified for that award, just waiting for the rest of the country to catch up.

Brexit was never going to actually make things better. Maybe some of the snakeoil sailesman believed the lies they told, but a pusher should never sample his own wares, but as time has gone on, we have heard rumblings that this is not the true Brexit, and indeed what is needed is a Conservative Brexit.

Whatever that might be.

Brexit is in a Groundhog Day loop of rediscovering of previously failed solutions to the issues we see today, the main one being how to avoid checks at borders for goods, and whether that be IT systems of facilitation or whatever. We've been here before, and if that was a workable slution, it's be in place now.

Its not.

IT may replace physical checks, for the most part, but not yet, and there would need to be trust, and trust is in short supply in the EU with the UK.

This week, David Frost has joned a Whatsap group of MPs in the CRG, Covid Recovery Group, which is almost the same as the ERG. Frost has no role in Government now, and the reason for his knighthood has now gone, so will Johnson unenoble him? Probably not.

But the reason for me mentioning this, is , when the time comes, who would replace Johnson as leader of the Conservative (and Union) Party? It would make sense for it to be a Brexiteer, but there is no agreed definition of Brexit, so both May and Johnson were nominal Remainers at some point, so when the failure inevitably happens, that leader's failer can be put down to not being a true believer or Brexiteer.

Interestingly, leader of a political party in office does not have to be an MP to become Prime Minister, the party could electe anyone, and as long as they had the support of Parliament, that would be OK. Lords have been PM before, so why not Frost? It might explain his resignation letter and now joining the CRG (and ERG), maybe this was his promised job if he resigned when he did?

As Chris Grey pondered, if this were the case, then wouldn't Frost have mentioned the betrayal of Brexit with the softening line on the UCJ in his resignation letter?

All this surmises that there is a plan. And so far it is clear there has been no real plan for Brexit, other than to get to the end of each day for the PM, or the end of the week, and generally ignore the warnings of the consequences of the policy.

Having a ord as PM would mean he would not be able to take part in PWQs with the Leader of the Opposition, a rotating band of stooges could take his place, while less scrutiny of the exectutive would be enabled.

I don't know. It made sense in my head.

Meanwhile Brexit, in practice, is still going bad, and getting worse. On Saturday new regulations were brought it, and the UK system has been dogged by bugs, but interestingly, the system means that freight doesn't leave warehouses and distribution centres until the papaerwork is correct, meaning there are no queueus leading to ports, as the trucks can't leave until the system says their paperwork is in order, so the metric of failure, a traffic jam up the M20 from Dover Eastern Docks to London and beyond hasn't happened.

And there are no obvious shortages of fresh fruit and vegetables. Yet.

This could be because there wqas stock left over from Christmas and New Year, the first week of January has low freigt traffic, maybe next week there might be clearer indication of delays and shortages?