!-- consent -->
What vocabulary is left for a choice like the one we face tomorrow? We have no words to convey the magnitude.
Labour is banking on our innumeracy. I don’t say that they are taking us for fools. Plenty of clever and educated people can’t process numbers on that scale.
His attitude ought to worry us. I mean that literally. All these men believed that the end justified the means.
Had he been on the Left, he would have been regarded as one of our towering public intellectuals. But he committed the ultimate sin: he was a Thatcherite.
The constant mistake of the pro-Brussels Establishment has been to assume that voters – especially Leave voters – are thick.
The idea that self-government might matter to Johnson or Gove more than, say, party loyalty leaves him genuinely nonplussed.
We must not allow a situation where, through oversight, such a child, years from now, could face a Windrush-type debacle.
Over the past three years, we have seen large chunks of our bureaucracy – civil servants, quangocrats and other officials – working to frustrate the referendum result.
The first-past-the-post system is capricious. It protects you until all of sudden, it eliminates you. Ask Scottish Labour.
Staying on would be a tragedy for the Conservative Party, which could very well cease to be viable as a party of government.
I have spent 30 years working to restore our national independence. I’m not prepared to drop out now, not when we are so close to success.
Even worse is the politicisation of the Speaker’s Chair. The impartiality of Britain’s Speaker was, like the impartiality of its monarch, a given.
When we bend the rules in our favour, we cheapen our country. We become, in effect, the colonial power that the IRA accuse us of being.
As long as traditional Labour voters stick with the party, opportunities for the Independent Group will be limited.
The EU asks: what do you want? But the Commons has said what it wants. Namely, the so-called Brady Amendment.