Friday 6 July 2018

Nick Robinson v Hugh Sykes


It's too hot to be following things closely tonight but my social media feed (probably unlike Miranda Sawyer's) is showing a wide range of reactions to matters related to Mrs May's apparent cabinet getaway Brexit plan. 

Besides the ardent anti-Brexiteers I follow, I'm seeing the Spectator calling it Mrs May's "third way", Guido Fawkes calling it the "softest Brexit" and the BBC's Nick Robinson saying that the EU might still reject it in favour of a "softer deal":
Cabinet agreement to Brexit plan matters as it undermines the “we can’t really negotiate because you won’t tell us what you want” excuse used by Brussels. EU27 must now whether to take plan seriously or reject it in hope parliament votes for softer deal.
Now, you - in the light of Guido's claim that this is the "softest Brexit" (a point of view) - may have picked up on Nick saying that a "softer deal" is possible (another point of view) but 'the other side' have been raging at Nick this evening for using the word "excuse".

A representative tweet runs as follows:
How on earth can you be so misleading as to call it an excuse? The EU hasn't been able to negotiate because the UK hasn't presented anything to negotiate. Am sick of this distorting of the facts from the BBC. Licence fee payers deserve better from their public broadcaster
It’s not an excuse though is it? Why use emotive language? No wonder people question your and the BBCs impartiality on Brexit.
Since when does a reason become an excuse? The BBC really has lost its way and become the mouthpiece for the government. 
And even Nick's BBC colleague Hugh 'I hang my views up with my coat' Sykes has joined in the criticism:
What was the EU supposed to do,   g u e s s   what the UK government wanted - which has never been stated until this evening, more than two years after the EU Referendum vote?
So who's right? Nick or Hugh? Or neither? And why do people only pick up on parts of what someone says when getting offended?


  1. As the Remainiacs have always been fond of telling us, the EU is in the driving seat. We can't demand anything of them. It is entirely in their gift what they might wish to offer us. So - for once (and I think it is unique) - I have to pat Nick on the back for giving an accurate analysis of the realities. The EU has been using this "tell us what you want" thing as a negotiating tactic. If we had a half decent PM she would simply have stood up made a major speech and demanded the EU make clear its position: will they impose a hard NI border even if we don't? - will they refuse security co-operation to protect the Baltic States? - will they refuse the idea of a free trade agreement with the UK?

    But May is just a pathetic excuse for a negotiator when it comes to the EU (however well she might deal with the Brexiteers in her Cabinet).

  2. It may be right. The EU and various politicians in it like to come out with this petulant line that it was the UK who decided to leave; the EU didn't ask them to or want them to. They sound like whining children. But it's still an opinion on Robinson's part.


Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.