Brexit

It’s hardly a surprise that Russian and American views of the world differ sharply. But there is one area of unexpected congruence in Moscow and Washington: Brexit. Travelling between both capitals, it is hard to tell the difference between the perplexity and even suspicion with which Britain’s ongoing and bungled departure from the EU is being viewed. Of course, the two administrations have rather different interests when it comes to Brexit. In the United States, there is some excitement among big business about the prospect of the UK market opening up. In the main though the feeling is one of dismay about the crisis gripping one of the country’s closest allies.

On Friday, in an inconspicuous metal finishing factory on an industrial estate in Coventry, Nigel Farage officially launched his new Brexit Party, and set out its strategy ahead of the European Parliament elections on 23 May. The message of the day was clear: the people, especially Leave voters, have been let down by the Westminster establishment, and voting for the Brexit party is the best way to show that you are angry, and willing to do something about it. Kitted out in his customary Union Flag socks, Farage hit out at the way the Brexit negotiations had been conducted so far, describing it as a ‘wilful betrayal of the greatest

Nigel Farage announced the launch of his new Brexit party today, in a metal finishing factory in Longford, Coventry. As you’d expect, Farage channeled the anger many Leave voters are feeling across the country in his speech. He predicted that the Brexit party would come first in the upcoming European Parliament elections and said he had already put down a £1,000 bet on this outcome. But it was his headline choice of candidate for these elections that caused surprise in the room. Saying that he had received over 1,000 applications from people hoping to become MEPs, he introduced one of the first to be selected: Annunziata Rees-Mogg, the journalist and

Dear Remainer parliament. Although we’re the voters who spurned the petition for this very course of action, we the undersigned formally request that you please revoke Article 50 at your earliest convenience. For Philip, Oliver, Dominic, Amber, Greg, et al (forgive the familiar first names, but over the last few months we’ve come to feel we know you so terribly well), this appeal from your nemeses may come as a surprise. After all, it was to appease us knuckle-draggers that you invoked the Article in the first place. Apologies for seeming so fickle. But in what Charles Moore has aptly dubbed Europe’s contemporary ‘empire’, all roads lead not to Rome

My first encounter with a plan to hold not one but two referendums on Britain’s European Union membership happened more than three years ago. At least two individuals were actively entertaining the idea. Both were Leavers. Dominic Cummings had proposed it in one of his blogs. Boris Johnson had not publicly endorsed such a thing, but (I know) was discussing it with interest privately. The thinking, as I recall, was similar in both cases. The first referendum would be the one we then faced: asking voters for a yes or no to the idea that in principle we should quit. If the result was Remain, we’d remain. If Leave, there