Seven ways Boris Johnson’s Brexit speech totally missed the point

Left Foot Forward

Hypocritical, fact-free and contradictory, the Foreign Secretary's speech signified anything but a shift on the Leave side. 

‘Betrayal’: that’s the word Boris Johnson used this morning to describe attempts to stop Brexit. It has been met with near-universal derision. 

The Foreign Secretary used a keynote speech to supposedly outline a ‘vision’ for post-Brexit Britain – and ward off attempts to give the public a fresh say.

Here’s just a sample of what he said:

“I fear that some people are becoming ever more determined to stop Brexit, to reverse the referendum vote of June 23 2016…I believe that would be a disastrous mistake that would lead to permanent and ineradicable feelings of betrayal. We cannot and will not let it happen.”

Commentators were quick to spot the glaring errors and gaps in his speech.

1. Johnson talked about betrayal. Let’s break that down for a start.  

2. He denies Brexit has provoked an ‘insular’ mentality. Yet the very campaign he backed was founded on closing off our borders and shutting ourselves off.

3. From the get-go – what is this speech for? It’s hard to see it as anything other than either cover for his own Cabinet battles, or grandstanding to boost his leadership potential. Either way, his calls for ‘unity’ and reaching out to Remainers ring hollow. 

4. It conveniently ignored the hard facts…

5. He is a sore winner.

6. It’s entire raison d’etre was flawed. 

7. For a speech from an egotist, it was totally lacking in self-awareness… 

Hypocritical, fact-free and contradictory, Johnson’s speech signified the very opposite of a grand shift on the Leave side.

This was Leave to a tee – riddled with misleading claims and – ironically for a successful campaign – bitterness.

Now, if you’ll excuse me, I’d like to enjoy the rest of my Valentine’s Day without any more of that.

Josiah Mortimer is Editor of Left Foot Forward. Follow him on Twitter.

No related posts.

4 Responses to “Seven ways Boris Johnson’s Brexit speech totally missed the point”

  1. patrick newman

    This was all about a message to the PM not to backslide on a hard Brexit and a message to the remainers/soft exiteers in the Cabinet to pipe down. It was not by any stretch of the imagination an attempt to unify the country, to bring the two groups together. It did not advance our understanding of what we are in for post Brexit. The obvious corollary that the Transition phase is a waste of time seemed not to have occurred to those present who were allowed to ask questions.

  2. Jimmy glesga

    Unifying the country is impossible unless we are physically attacked by an enemy. The EU is a superstate and not democratic. We will leave and hopefully the people in the remainder of the EU will get rid of the wine swigging beaurocrats their, floozies and bum bhoys. They must be pissin themselves laughing at the working clases who subsidise their lifestyles.

  3. Lawman

    Politicians and journalists are largely simplistic in their comments: Remain/ Leave good and Leave/ Remain bad.

    I suspect most voters retain their respective broad views as expressed on 23/06/16, but want to know more about the respective implications. Saying ‘Remain makes us a slave of a super state EU’ or ‘Leave will bankrupt us’ is as unhelpful as it is untrue; although either could happen.

    By now HMG should have explained the form and likely implications of Leave. Only then can we form a view.

  4. Monica

    It is sad that when it comes to the EU, some educated people have no qualms in pronouncing fact-free untruths. All the information about the EU is there at their finger tips, literally, online, but they choose to repeat something they have been told and have naively swallowed. The European Union is the most successful international
    project for preventing war by integrating the economies of
    independent countries. In 1957, after two world wars causing
    over 120 million casualties, mostly civilians, 6 countries –
    former enemies, set up a new system of cooperation, allowing free movement of their people, goods, and services. Now the EU’s 28 member-countries, by operating jointly-agreed rules, have become the world’s biggest economy and largest trading block. It it’s structure is more like a giant cooperative that makes a great effort to get all its members to agree initiatives, via rounds of negotiations to achieve consensus.
    Britain’s 45 years in the EU allowed it to remain prominent
    in the world after the loss of its empire. The UK is a player in
    all EU institutions, such as its Parliament, Commission, Court
    of Justice, Court of Auditors, and regulatory Agencies. In the
    EU, British governments, elected politicians, diplomats, and
    professional administrators have agreed a vast range of
    actions beneficial to all inhabitants. Participating in the EU’s
    economy and legal system has led to improved rights for us
    as consumers, workers, women, parents, vulnerable minorities,
    small business people amongst others. Together, member-states
    are involved in rescuing our damaged environments and
    preventing further deterioration. Only by sharing our policies and scientific expertise in the EU can we find solutions to the ongoing economic, financial, security, and environmental challenges, including the human disasters of poverty and inequality.
    The EU has more elective and representative organs and formal policy advisory bodies than the UK: 2 legislative bodies (Parliament of elected MEPs and Council of Ministers made up of ministers from 28 separate elected governments of member-states ); an inter-governmental policy organ (European Council); a governing body initiating policy, made up of representatives of all member-governments (Commission, elected by the elected Parliament), a statuary policy organ composed of representatives of private and public businesses, trade unions, and civil society organisations. In addition, a written Treaty giving us transparency over how the EU works. Plus we (each inhabitant of the EU) has the power of direct appeal to a court of law if our own Member-state is failing to implement what it has agreed to do, ie Treaty articles and jointly agreed laws.

Comments are closed.