On Thursday 9 November, The Times published an article by the home secretary entitled, ‘Suella Braverman brands Met police biased over pro-Palestinian protest’. The much-criticised article came after days of media speculation regarding a planned march in London this weekend.

Initially, there were concerns that the march would interfere with the Remembrance Day service at the Cenotaph on Sunday. But it soon became clear, to any with their eyes and their hearts open, that the two events were on different days and in different parts of London, so one was unlikely to interfere with the other. The article seems to have been in direct response to Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley’s comments a day earlier that there were insufficient grounds to ban this weekend’s march.

Home Secretary Suella Braverman repeats her assertion that pro-Palestinian protestors are “hate marchers” and accuses police of showing “favouritism”.

Two questions:
1. Did PM sanction this?
2. Can he tolerate a rival leadership campaign in plain sight?https://t.co/BkMiCgouzv

— Paul Brand (@PaulBrandITV) November 8, 2023

In her article, Braverman asks the question, “are some public displays so offensive that they deserve to be banned?” Clearly, she believes the answer to be yes, and that doesn’t apply just to marches. In fact, the list of things that the home secretary finds offensive is a long one, including, not least, the homeless and asylum seekers. What’s worse is she claims to speak on behalf of the “compassionate” British public.

According to the home secretary, the pro-Palestinian movement “has mobilised tens of thousands of angry demonstrators and marched them through London every weekend”. She refuted the claim that the marches were a “cry for help for Gaza” and even accused the march group’s organisers of having links to terrorist organisations, including Hamas. She again used the term “hate marchers”, adding that she did not “resile” from the term

Braverman: police ‘playing favourites’

Braverman suggested these events were problematic, not because of the “violence around the fringes” but because of “the highly offensive content of chants, posters and stickers”. She believes “there is a perception that senior police officers play favourites when it comes to protestors”, with the police favouring the left. A claim that Mr. Stop Brexit, Steve Bray, would no doubt dispute most vigorously. She suggested that aggressive right-wing protestors are met with a “stern response” from the police, while their left-wing counterparts are “largely ignored” when displaying the same behaviour. Senior former and serving officers agreed with her that there was a “double standard”, she claimed, though not enough for any of them to have been quoted directly, it would seem.

Suella Braverman is "deliberately undermining respect for the police", shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper tells the Commons

She says the home secretary's comments are "irresponsible and dangerous"https://t.co/Xh2HtCujz6 pic.twitter.com/xdc65tuEyI

— BBC Politics (@BBCPolitics) November 9, 2023

Strong criticism from Labour

Shadow Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper, didn’t mince her words. She accused the home secretary of “attacking police impartiality” and “deliberately undermining respect for the police”. Braverman was “deliberately inflaming community tensions in the most dangerous of ways”, and was attacking the police at a time when she should be supporting them.

Cooper described Braverman’s comments as “highly irresponsible and dangerous”, and said that many former police chiefs were lining up to condemn her. She asked if the government “still believe in the operational independence of the police” and questioned whether the prime minister had endorsed the article. If he had done so, or was too weak to sack Braverman, then he had “given up”, and both the prime minister and the home secretary should go.

Chris Bryant described Suella Braverman as “a danger”, adding that her article “imperils good policing” and “inflames an already difficult situation”. He pointed out that only two Conservative MPs spoke in the House of Commons in defence of the home secretary, and only a handful were in attendance. He said not only was there no place for hate on our streets, but there was no place for hate in the Home Office either. The home secretary was trying to “command the police” and was “inciting hatred”.

Shadow Leader of the House, Lucy Powell, called the home secretary “out of control”, “utterly irresponsible” and “unhinged”. Cooper also critici

Chris Bryant; The fact that only 2 Tory MPs turned up to defend Suella Braverman… shows she's already lost the support of the house.. there's no place for hate in the HO.. she's trying to command the police & that completely breaches.. the operational independence of the police pic.twitter.com/EAalO7vDMf

— Haggis_UK 🇬🇧 🇪🇺 (@Haggis_UK) November 9, 2023

What did Downing Street know?

After much speculation on social media, regarding whether the prime minister had endorsed, or even seen, the Times article ahead of publication, Number 10 were forced to issue a statement. Downing Street had not signed off on the content, despite claims from Braverman’s aides to the contrary. Policing Minister, Chris Philps, when asked if Downing Street had approved the article said, “I’m afraid I don’t have any visibility on that at all”. No change there, then.

In fact, Number 10 had reviewed the content – even suggesting “major changes” – but it would appear those suggestions were ignored. The Downing Street response was then quickly followed by suggestions that Braverman was perhaps – not for the first time – in breach of the ministerial code. A Number 10 spokesperson confirmed that “the content was not agreed” and that the matter was being looked into. The ministerial code clearly states that the policy content and timing of all major press releases, interviews and appearances should be cleared by Number 10 “to ensure the effective coordination of cabinet business”.

Sky News confirms Downing Street did not fully sign off the Home Secretary's article in the Times today. It's understood No10 were sent it and suggested changes that were not then carried out, via @SamCoatesSky

— Beth Rigby (@BethRigby) November 9, 2023

No doubt there will be calls for Braverman’s resignation from the Home Office. Again. Even Sunak’s misguided predecessor had the temerity to fire the home secretary during her short reign in Number 10. Of course, it is possible, as many – including Cooper – have suggested, that this is exactly what Braverman wants, so she can openly campaign to be the next leader of the Conservatives/the next prime minister. Though its hard to see how that might look any different from what she’s doing right now.

The home secretary closed her article with, “the public will expect to see an assertive and proactive approach to any displays of hate, breaches of conditions and general disorder”. Perhaps, in the interests of free speech, democracy and tolerance, the police might like to start with the home secretary herself. Surely Braverman has done more to incite hatred, violence and division that any protestor on the streets of London.

Have you seen our prime minister’s latest puff piece, celebrating his first year in office? No? Then, boy are you in for a treat!

At (thankfully) just 46 seconds long, it is a run-through of everything that “we’ve achieved” in the year since Rishi Sunak became PM. The list of so-called achievements scrolls past so fast as to be practically unreadable. Which is, perhaps, the point.

Just leaving this here… pic.twitter.com/mnDAqAa7xd

— Caroline Lucas (@CarolineLucas) October 25, 2023

Feedback

In the first 24 hours after posting on X, Sunak’s video collected almost four million views. Surprisingly, it also recorded almost three million likes. What was less surprising was the responses. Having scrolled through all of them (so you don’t have to), I only found one short message of support. The ridicule, however, was widespread.

Caroline Lucas drew attention to Sunak’s many failures on climate change, described by Sunak as a “new approach to net zero”. Others criticised Sunak for “gaslighting”, cried “shame on you”, called him a “clown”, or much worse, while others drew attention to his many failures or simply scoffed at his ridiculous claims.

You certainly have achieved a lot:

Immigration backlog – up.
NHS waiting lists – up.
Cost of living – up.
Corruption – up.
Crime – up.

Please feel free to add any I may have missed but I’d say you’ve absolutely smashed it; the country that is. Smashed it to pieces.

— Don McGowan {the ethical Blue Tick} (@donmcgowan) October 25, 2023

Sunak’s so-called achievements

Amongst Sunak’s claims were a list of things the government have banned (XL bully dogs, nitrous oxide, strikes in school, protest), plus a list of spurious claims, such as record levels of NHS funding, falling crime and a million new homes. Funny but, despite extensive research, I can only find reference to a Sunak commitment, made in July, to build one million homes before the end of this parliament. Surely, had that goal been achieved, we’d have heard a lot about it, and no doubt had a special PM video celebrating the fact.

Many of Sunak’s so-called achievements haven’t even happened yet. His “long term decisions for a brighter future” included a “long-term NHS workforce plan”, “expanding childcare” and a “smoke free generation”. I’m not sure exactly how long Sunak thinks the Conservatives are going to remain in power, but it certainly isn’t long-term. His own stay in power might be even shorter, now his Conservative colleagues are free to submit letters of no confidence to the 1922 committee

The five priorities

When Sunak spoke of his five priorities in his New Year’s speech, he called on the British public to “trust” him. He claimed his five pledges would “deliver peace of mind — five foundations, on which to build a better future for our children and grandchildren”. Not only that, he was going to be “straining every sinew” in order to achieve his goals.

The first of those pledges – halving inflation – was expected to happen anyway over the following 12 months, with or without any government actions. As for the other four pledges, Sunak and his government seem to have made matters worse, rather than better.

The second and third pledges – growing the economy and reducing debt – are not going to plan. While there has been some recent improvement in the UK economy, the IMF are still predicting just 0.5% growth in 2023 – the second worst in the G7. As for reducing debt, the level of UK debt has actually risen to the highest levels in 60 years, and in June passed 100% of GDP for the first time since 1961.

“Rishi Sunak is doing a great job. The Government is delivering” (on the peoples 5 priorities) Conservative party chairman Greg Hands tells @SkyNews

Imagine his shock when he watches this
pic.twitter.com/cFZ2vYxdBt

— Peter Stefanovic (@PeterStefanovi2) April 16, 2023

Sunak’s fourth pledge – cutting waiting lists – for the NHS, has proved to be another epic failure. Just this month, the waiting list in England alone hit a record high of 7.75 million people awaiting treatment (as at the end of August). With further strikes likely in the medical sector thanks to the government’s intransigence on pay, this is only likely to get worse.

The final pledge – stopping the boats – has also failed miserably, with record numbers of desperate migrants risking their lives to cross the Channel. According to Migration Watch UK, the Home Office is expecting the numbers for 2023 to reach 85,000 by the end of the year. Not only would that set a new record high but is roughly equivalent to the total number of arrivals between 2018 and 2022. And all as a direct consequence of Brexit and this government’s policies.

In his video, the prime minister admits that “there’s so much more to do”. Whether he, or his government, are given the opportunity to do more good, or harm, seems increasingly unlikely. The video ends with the question “so what can a country achieve in 52 weeks?” and ends with the words “watch this space”. Well, we’ve been watching, and it seems that the only thing Sunak can celebrate after a year in office is outlasting his predecessor. I doubt there are many, except the delusional few, that honestly believe we can expect anything more from this PM, or this government. They’ve had 13 years, and the evidence of their damage is everywhere you look. But don’t expect to see that in any videos.

Northern Ireland Minister Steve Baker has been sharing his thoughts on referendums with the British Irish Parliamentary Assembly. The self-proclaimed ‘hard man of Brexit’ told the assembly that the Brexit referendum “probably should have been a supermajority” requiring 60% voter support. That’s despite his having voted against an SNP amendment to the EU referendum bill in 2015 calling for just that. He added that it would not be advisable, in any future vote on Irish unification, to accept a “50% plus one” decision.

2010: Steve Baker, "I think the European Union should be wholly torn down"

2023: Steve Baker wants an Irish Unification referendum to have a tighter standard than the Brexit referendum.

Is he making the case to reverse Brexit as a 60% supermajority threshold was not met? pic.twitter.com/nI5uEFOOCz

— Farrukh (@implausibleblog) October 23, 2023

We’d have lost

Baker was a prominent figure in the Leave campaign in the run up to the Brexit referendum and an active ‘Brexit Spartan’ in its aftermath. Despite Theresa May’s hard red lines on Brexit, Baker voted against her deal three times, presumably because it wasn’t hard enough. He later told Newsnight that “holding those tigers by the tail”, between 2016 and 2019, had cost him his mental health. Much of the country felt the same way. Many of us still do.

Baker suggested that not having a supermajority threshold had caused the country serious political “trouble”. Indeed. But he failed to mention the government’s seeming willingness to stir up that division, to spread misinformation, and to fail to have any implementation plan whatsoever.

He admitted that had there been a supermajority in the Brexit referendum, “we’d have lost and we’d still be in (the EU)”. But at least “everybody would have abided by the result”, including the government, presumably. He added that it was “inconceivable” that we would have had “all of the political difficulty which followed from members of parliament in particular refusing to accept the result”.

Referendum “met the threshold for illegality”

Baker failed, of course, to mention that those refusing to accept the result, politicians or no, were raising other important issues when “refusing to accept the result”. Such as the outrageous promises and outright lies of the Leave campaign. Or the fact that, according to Sir James Eadie QC, Theresa May’s legal counsel, the referendum “met the threshold for illegality”.

#SteveBaker calling for super majorities of at least 60% in all future referendums opens the wounds of the fraud perpetrated on the British people by the #Brexit ref, which was deliberately fashioned as advisory so that it couldn't be challenged but sold to the public as binding. pic.twitter.com/ZphvaXdTOJ

— 💙@KTParker@mastodon.online 🇫🇷🇬🇧🇪🇸🇺🇦🌻 (@lunaperla) October 24, 2023

In my 2019 court case – ‘Wilson and others versus the Prime Minister’ – I challenged the government over the legality of the referendum result. With the referendum being merely advisory, rules that would have applied had the result been binding, did not apply.

Had the referendum been legally binding, parliament would have had “a statutory legal mechanism by which it would be annulled”, as they do with elections. So, the government, and Baker presumably, knew the referendum result to be illegal but decided to proceed regardless, and with no idea how to do so. While David Cameron had promised to honour the result, that was before the illegality was fully known or understood. And in any case, he didn’t hang around long enough to honour anything.

An ulterior motive?

I don’t doubt that Baker is sincere in hoping to ensure that, in the event of a vote on the unification of Ireland, a supermajority threshold be required. Not only would it give the result legitimacy, but it would make it easier for the public, and the politicians, to get behind the outcome. It might also make the unification of Ireland a more difficult goal to achieve – a factor that may be influencing Baker’s thinking.

Baker says that had 60% of the voting public decided to leave the EU in 2016, the road to Brexit, even with the Conservatives in charge, would have been smoother and the country less divided. Whether to ensure legitimacy or prevent division, there will be those arguing for a supermajority in the event of any future referendum on rejoining the EU. No doubt hard man Baker and his fellow Spartans will be amongst them.

But, even if the hard man of Brexit has now gone soft on democracy, it’s hard not to conclude that he has an ulterior motive – one that will ensure that his beloved Brexit is secure. He’s known all along that a supermajority is a much tougher threshold to achieve. Which is why he voted against it 2015.

Don’t be fooled: what Steve Baker is ‘really’ saying is that any vote to rejoin the EU should require a supermajority.

— Keith Burge (@carryonkeith) October 24, 2023

On Wednesday, the EU sealed a historic deal on the future management of asylum seekers in the event of sudden rises in migrant numbers. The Crisis Regulation – which was three years in the making – met with opposition from Hungary and Poland and saw Slovakia, the Czech Republic, and Austria abstaining. The deal aims to prevent a repeat of 2015 when an influx of a million refugees, mostly from war-torn Syria, were unevenly distributed across EU member states.

"Historic EU deal reached on how to manage sudden rise in asylum seekers"

This could be transformative for how the EU copes with mass migrations brought about by wars or natural disasters.https://t.co/8NBod3yqQT

— Edwin Hayward (@edwinhayward) October 4, 2023

With the objective of sharing the weight of asylum seekers across the bloc, the preliminary agreement has still to be passed by the European Parliament. However, the agreement was warmly welcomed by President of the EU Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who described it as a “real game changer” that would allow negotiations in the European Parliament to advance. Fernando Grande-Marlaska Gómez, acting Spanish minister for home affairs said, “we are now in a better position to reach an agreement on the entire asylum and migration pact with the European Parliament by the end of this semester.”

The Crisis Regulation

The new rules will allow the fast-tracking of asylum applications that will facilitate the movement of migrants to other European countries. In times of crisis – such as climate emergencies, natural disasters or war – an accelerated registration process will see the necessary paperwork completed in just four weeks. The responsibility for examining and processing the asylum claim would then fall to the supporting member state.

Member states will be allowed to apply tougher measures while asylum claims are being examined. Those measures could include allowing asylum seekers to be held at the border for up to 20 weeks. Rejected applicants could also be held for up to 20 weeks before the process of returning them is completed.

Where the agreement falls short – according to Guy Verhofstaft, MEP – is in failing to open European embassies and consulates outside of the EU to asylum applications. Doing so, Verhofstadt says, was the “only way to stop smugglers” and to prevent refugees from “dying in the Mediterranean Sea”.

The only way to stop the smugglers is to open our consulates and embassies outside Europe to apply for asylum…instead of obliging them to jump in boats and dying in the Mediterranean sea ! pic.twitter.com/Ojern0Cddj

— Guy Verhofstadt (@guyverhofstadt) October 4, 2023

UK inaction despite awareness

According to the Institute for Economics and Peace, environmental change, conflict and civil unrest could result in over one billion people at threat of being displaced by 2050. In regard to the climate crisis alone, the UK government recently published a paper detailing how the crisis is likely to increase migrant flow over the coming decades. In it they stated that, “while there is no agreed upon way of reliably forecasting future flows of migration which result directly from climate change, the numbers are likely to be significant”.

An earlier government paper – Preparing for climate change – discusses the impact of climate change in the UK and actions that will be necessary to deal with the challenges. Yet, despite obviously being well aware of the impact of global warming on migrant numbers, and on the UK in particular, the government are kicking the climate crisis can down the road. The only discernible ‘policy’ on migration seems to be to scream ‘stop the boats’ enough times at full volume and hope for the best.

EU getting on with business

While our own government seem intent only on jockeying for position, arguing amongst themselves and focusing on the coming election, we can only watch from the sidelines at progress being made in Europe. The EU, without the UK, is getting on with business. And perhaps some of that business is more easily conducted without us.

Today, leaders from 47 countries are gathering in Granada, Spain for a meeting of the European Political Community. This group – which includes EU member states, the UK, Ukraine and western Balkan states – first met last October in the Czech Republic. The agenda for this third EPC summit will include aid for Ukraine, deepening conflicts on the continent, and migration.

It is an opportunity for Britain to mend some fences and discuss common solutions to shared problems. I suspect, instead, our government will be trying to share their own divisive, right-wing rhetoric on immigration to a largely non-receptive audience.

As European leaders gather, Rishi Sunak will likely take every opportunity to be photographed at Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s side. Indeed, he wouldn’t be the first British PM to do so. No doubt Sunak will offer help and support to the war effort, and mean it. But in doing so, he might be hoping the Ukrainian president doesn’t mention support for refugees. There is a limit, after all!

Members of campaign group Bremain in Spain had a busy and productive weekend in London, attending, and speaking, at the second National Rejoin March and holding our annual general meeting.

On Thursday 21 September, Sue Wilson, Lisa Burton and other members of the Bremain in Spain Council landed in London for the start of a great weekend. Sue arrived by Eurostar from Brussels after visiting the European Parliament to witness the inauguration of ‘Our Star’, a symbol of friendship, unity and hope. The rest of us travelled from various parts of the Spanish mainland and islands for our first get-together in person for almost a year.

Annual general meeting

For our meeting on Friday we were joined by friends and colleagues from Volt España, the National Rejoin March, Save Freedom of Movement and Grassroots for Europe.

The Bremain Council was delighted to welcome those who took the time to attend in-person and online and took the opportunity to thank all the group’s members for their continued support.

The big day

On Saturday 23 the sun was shining and the skies were blue when we set out to central London to meet up with thousands of Rejoiners from all over the UK and Europe for the second National Rejoin March. We greeted old friends and new as we assembled on Park Lane. The Bremain in Spain Council was joined on the march by loyal members including Keir Duncan, Tracey O’Rourke, and Trevor Perfect, and many others.

The march set off at 1pm, headed by the speakers carrying a banner declaring “We want our Star Back”. They included our vice chair, Lisa Burton, and our friend from Volt España, Rachele Arciulo, who had travelled from Barcelona to give a speech at the rally. They were flanked by familiar faces such as the German Green MEP Terry Reintke, former Belgian PM and EU Brexit coordinator, Guy Verhofstadt, the great campaigner Gina Miller, and Mr Stop Brexit, Steve Bray.

Behind them, marchers waved all the flags of the European Union. Our chair Sue Wilson proudly carried the Spanish flag, representing all of us British citizens in Spain, and Spanish citizens in the UK.

We wound our way along Piccadilly and Pall Mall to Trafalgar Square. A police source told organisers that the numbers were in excess of 20,000. The atmosphere was, as ever, joyful, with friendly waves from passing tourists and honks of support from taxis, buses and cars. In Whitehall we marched past a small but vocal demonstration by a handful of dog owners protesting the proposed ban on the XL Bully breed, a demonstration that was shown on the BBC News, while its reporters and cameras mysteriously failed to spot tens of thousands of Rejoiners filing past a few metres away!

Halfway down Whitehall we were greeted by ‘Our Star’, brought over just the day before from Brussels for the first leg of its trek around the UK over the next few months.

Inspiring speakers

The highlight of the day was, of course, the speeches in Parliament Square. The crowds cheered as Terry Reintke told us “We are still with you, we love you and we want you back”, and the Green Party’s Zack Polanski declared that “Brexit has failed”.

Lisa Burton represented Bremain in Spain on the stage this year, and she did us more than proud. She spoke of how Brexit has affected the lives of those who took advantage of freedom of movement when we could, and of our pain that future generations have been denied that right:

Her heartfelt speech was roundly applauded as she explained that we campaign precisely because we are patriots, and she called on politicians to acknowledge that rejoining the EU is now inevitable.

Also from Spain, Rachele Arciulo of Volt España, spoke of the need for unity among all Europeans, saying that:

The future in their hands

Young people were well represented among the speakers. 21-year-old Ceira Sergeant expressed the frustration of those who were too young to vote when the referendum happened – those “who never got the chance to have their voices heard”.

Other young campaigners included 2018 Young European of the Year, Madeleina Kay, who talked about the ‘Brexiles’ she met throughout Europe, who are trapped by the borders that prevent them moving on.

Stella Mavropoulou, a Greek student and activist who lives in London, said:

The final speaker of the day was the courageous campaigner, Gina Miller, who said that:

In the final words of the final speech:

The more they refuse to hear, the louder our voices

The star of the day, however, was undoubtedly the indefatigable NRM organiser Peter Corr. For the second year running he and his dedicated team of volunteers have worked tirelessly to make this event happen. He told us:

On Wednesday 20 September, en route to the Bremain in Spain AGM and the National Rejoin March in London, I took a slight diversion via Brussels. I had been invited to speak at the inauguration ceremony of ‘Our Star’ – an event hosted by German MEP and vocal anti-Brexit supporter Terry Reintke – it was an invitation I was delighted to accept.

Our Star

‘Our Star’ is the creation of German sculptor Jacques Tilly, whose earlier anti-Brexit works have included politically satirical floats such as the infamous ‘Gun’ sculpture, featuring Theresa May holding a gun in her mouth. Tilly’s floats have appeared at carnivals in Dusseldorf, as well as making regular appearances at anti-Brexit marches in London.

The ‘UK’s Star of European Peace’, a two-metre-tall talisman representing peace and unity was being exhibited and inaugurated in the European parliament, ahead of its appearance in London at the National Rejoin March II on Saturday 23 September. Following its appearance at the march, Our Star will then be making its way around the UK, including making appearances at party political conferences.

Reintke, who hosted the inauguration ceremony and exhibition, promised yet again to look after ‘our star’ on the flag of nations until we are ready to claim it back. In her usual passionate, anti-Brexit voice, she spoke of changing public opinion in the UK, and how our MEPs (not all of them, obviously) are missed in Europe. She reassured us, yet again, that the door is still open and that the EU are keeping the lights on for our return

At the heart of Europe

Other speakers included Richard Corbett (former leader of Labour in the EP), Sandra Khadhouri (director of Keeping Channels Open) and yours truly, speaking on behalf of UK nationals in the EU. Corbett will be appearing with Reintke again on Saturday, as both will be making their cases for the UK to rejoin the EU at the National Rejoin March.

This was my first trip to Brussels since before the pandemic, and it was a great pleasure to be back at the heart of Europe. Not only did it bring home to me the inclusive, collaborative nature of the EU community, but it highlighted the isolation and loneliness of go-it-alone Britain.

As I walked the corridors of the European parliament, listening to a multitude of European languages being spoken, I keenly felt the loss of my EU citizenship, and all the rights, benefits and opportunities that go along with it. Being back in the parliament building really brought it home to me how much we have lost and how much I had missed the warmth and the welcome.

The theme of the exhibition, organised by Peter French and Phil Jeanes, was one of hope. As I left the building, having listened to the speeches, and having met many fellow campaigners both from the UK and Europe, there was plenty of hope to go around. I came away with a strong feeling of belonging, gratitude and optimism.

The lights are on and the door is still open

Whether British politicians accept it or not, we are on a journey back to the EU, and it’s a journey that is increasingly gaining public support. With the rejoining of Horizon, we have taken a first step, and prime minister in waiting, Keir Starmer, has spoken of closer ties with Europe.

While there are significant limits on what can be achieved without rejoining the single market or the customs union – and a certain degree of cakeism and delusion from both main parties – we are on our way back to Europe. It’s the only course of action that makes any sense, and both the UK and the EU, understand that. Even if they won’t admit to it.

When Our Star leaves the European parliament building, it will be replaced by a smaller version, which will be on display until we can reclaim our rightful place at Europe’s side. As I said in my speech, “Our star is in very good hands. But hopefully not for too long. We really would rather like it back!”

And the sooner the better! Enough damage has been done already. Let’s not add to it by delaying our return any longer than is necessary. As Reintke and fellow MEP Guy Verhofstadt never hesitate to remind us, and will do so again on Saturday, the lights are on and the door is open. We just have to walk through it.