Credit: Chris J Ratcliffe/Getty Images
![](https://unherd.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/graeme-100x100.jpg)
Let’s start with Luciana Berger. Ms Berger, the MP for Liverpool Wavertree, has been driven from the Labour Party because of the anti-Jewish hatred to which she has been subjected. No other recent event really matches it in importance.
Her former Party shames itself, so Ms Berger has taken back control of her political future. At least she has that. She could stand as a TIGger, an Eyore or even, one day, a Labour candidate again – don’t ever forget the moral force with which she delivered her exit speech. She has control.
Control matters; without it, little else does. At work, the other day, in a Skype meeting – you know, you’re all in different places but you’re working together in a virtual ‘meeting room’ on your computer – William (on the other side of the world) said, “Can I just add [some text] on this page?”. As he clicked his cursor onto the menu, the message “Do you want William to take back control?” flashed up on mine. I said: “My favourite phrase!” and everyone laughed.
I say “everyone” and “laughed” but it would be more correct to note that the responses divided us neatly in two. The Leavers (I guess) laughed heartily. Others – Remainers? – were more nervous. More a polite cough, as though I’d said something controversial, like “Women are adult females”. Take Back Control was a genius brand for Leave, and Continuity Remain, or TIG, as it’s styled itself, has noticed.
Control of the narrative: that’s what TIG is about, and it’s why I feel sorry for Luciana Berger. Because her important message to the planet – look what Labour has become, and shudder, in horror – has been lost in the TIG’s principal narrative choice: that we must stay within the EU, and that it is reasonable and open-minded to do so, regardless of the referendum. That’s why Chuka, and not Luciana, is TIG’s de facto leader: as shiny a pro-EU Blairite as you could hope to find.
I’d always reckoned that a Blairite, pro-EU, pro-“human rights”, pro-Identity Politics grouping would be electorally toxic beyond a few metropolitan enclaves: those relatively small geographies whose denizens are rich enough to be protected from the consequence of their voting behaviour. I’ll admit to having daydreamed about watching Gina Miller taking her case to the voters of Sunderland, or Harlow (for example) with something approaching glee.
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
Subscribe“but merely inaccurately estimating the consequences and costs of their actions”. Says he who has incomplete data just like the rest of us.
It will be interesting to see who has been inaccurately estimating what when the dust settles.
It’s like climate change all over again. I don’t deny that climate change may be happening but the costs to the economy of stopping it changing need to be fully considered.
We have medical researchers, medical equipment manufacturers and pharmaceutical companies all asking for billions to be thrown at them. The experts advising the government will be indirectly linked to these companies. The independent voices are being drowned out by the hysteria and the panic.
There is something to be said for “safety first” but if that’s your only consideration I suggest you don’t get out of bed in the morning.
So people who didn’t believe the hype about Covid were either not nice or not rational? Lol. Where’s your article admitting the sceptics were right?
Ok well that’s me off, I left the Speccie to escape tripe like this.