The Remoaner cranks are finally giving up
The last time I saw Gina Miller was outside the Supreme Court in 2019, after Baroness Hale, of spider-brooch fame, ruled Boris Johnson's prorogation of parliament to be 'unlawful'.
Surrounded by fellow Remainers, Miller, who had taken the case to the highest court in the land, emerged victorious to the cheers of EU-flag wavers.
'Today is not a win for any individual or court,' she said, reading a prepared statement in her trademark Euro-blue blazer. 'It's a win for parliamentary sovereignty.'
It was an interesting hot take from the woman who spearheaded two legal attempts to reverse a 'once in a lifetime' democratic vote to leave the EU in 2016, supported by 17.5 million people.
It came after she had led the People's March for a(nother) People's Vote on the final Brexit deal, alongside Vince Cable, Caroline Lucas and Anna Soubry (remember them?).
By her own admission, Miller was the poster girl for Remain – a cause that she recently revealed may have been a contributing factor to her developing cancer.
The 59-year-old said she was even abused while hooked up to a chemotherapy drip at a London hospital, when a fellow patient shouted: 'You're that Brexit woman. I f---ing hate you'.
Yet it was a cross she was willing to bear.
Even after Johnson claimed to have 'got Brexit done', Miller continued campaigning through her True and Fair party, standing as the candidate for Epsom and Ewell at the last general election.
She was not elected, coming sixth out of the seven candidates and losing her deposit with a 1.5 per cent share of the vote.
Now it appears that the British-Guiana-born lawyer turned campaigner has finally had enough of politics altogether, after it emerged that True and Fair was dissolved via voluntary strike-off last week. It means the party will not make an appearance at next month's local elections.
Could this finally signal the end of Project Fear? Let's jolly well hope so. While we still have some Brussels backers trying to make out that Brexit had nothing to do with Sir Keir Starmer being offered a favourable 10 per cent tariff by Donald Trump, compared to the 20 per cent slapped on the 'protectionist' EU, the time has surely now come to celebrate the end of Euromania once and for all.
I remember witnessing peak Remain in the back of a taxi with Labour MP Barry Gardiner as we returned from a Question Time appearance in Dewsbury in 2018.
Gardiner, then shadow trade secretary, tried to argue that if Brexit went ahead 'there wouldn't be a sheep left in the fields of England'.
From memory, his argument centred on the idea that a free trade deal with America would wipe out our entire livestock. A most unlikely claim when it comes to sheep, as Wales alone harbours around 70 per cent more sheep than the entire United States.
Such was the level of scaremongering during that fretful period that even this didn't seem especially bonkers alongside claims that leaving the bloc would 'spark a year-long recession' (George Osborne), cause World War Three (David Cameron), result in Scotland winning a second independence referendum (Cameron again) and decimate Britain's influence on the world stage (Emmanuel Macron).
Far from being 'at the back of the queue', as Barack Obama once threatened, the Prime Minister is now in pole position for a US trade deal that even he and his fellow Eurolovers once claimed would result in Brits being force fed hormone-injected beef and chlorinated chicken. These were the very ideologues who once balked at the idea of turning the UK into Singapore on Thames – now they're hankering after its functioning low-tax state and seven per cent growth rate – as Leavers suggested they should nearly a decade ago.
We're in this mess precisely because we haven't maximised our post-Brexit freedoms – and instead stuck with the big state, high tax, virtue-signalling globalism that has turned Europe into such a basket case that it cannot even adequately defend Ukraine from a Russian invasion.
The Remainers claimed Brexit would break Britain. But in reality it's fallen foul of their own smug status quo-ism and the kind of anti-democratic lawfare waged by Miller and her Remainer ilk.
Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
37 minutes ago
- New York Post
Hooray! America is finally heading toward race and gender fairness
At long last, America is moving toward fairness in hiring, promotions, and college admissions. The latest good news: In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court said everyone deserves the same protection from discrimination, including straight white women and men. In the decades since Martin Luther King Jr. called on us to judge people by the 'content of their character,' this country has moved in the opposite direction. Racial preferences, Diversity Equity and Inclusion programs and quotas favoring women, LGBTQ+ and other groups replaced judging each individual. The average white guy or woman has been getting the shaft in corporate hiring, college admissions or even becoming a government supplier. But now that is changing. Recent events, including the Trump administration's bold disavowal of DEI and discriminatory practices in hiring and promotion, and the high court ruling in Ames v. Ohio on Thursday, suggest America is not doomed to be a hopelessly divided caste society where group identity trumps an individual's essence. We are starting to move in the right direction, where each individual can succeed on the merits. Marlean Ames' win on Thursday is another step forward. Ames, a 61-year-old white heterosexual woman, sued the Ohio Department of Youth Services, where she'd worked for 16 years. Despite getting favorable reviews and promotions, in 2020 she was turned down for a higher position that went to a lesbian, and then demoted, to be replaced by another gay man. She alleged discrimination based on her heterosexuality. Lower federal courts rejected Ames' claim , saying because she is part of a majority group — heterosexual white women — she had a higher burden of proof than a minority would have. But the justices ruled that having different standards for majority and minority groups violates Title VII, the portion of the landmark Civil Rights Act that outlawed workplace discrimination. Ames still has to prove her case in the lower courts, but she will be treated the same as any minority group member alleging discrimination, not facing what Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson termed a 'heightened standard' of evidence. The Supremes' ruling will reverberate in federal courts across America. In the Sixth Circuit and four other circuits, that double standard prevailed until now. Kudos to the top court for rejecting that two-tiered system of justice. 'Reverse' discrimination is as bad as any other kind. Proving it shouldn't be harder. Amen. We are in a new era that began with the Supreme Court's 2023 rulings striking down reverse discrimination at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. After George Floyd's death in 2020, many companies launched ambitious efforts to diversify their workforces. Though well-intentioned, they caused resentment and violated the nation's bedrock principle of color-blind equality. The justices' ruling against Harvard sent a signal to the corporate world to change course. Credit also goes to politicians — including Donald J. Trump — consumers and even corporate shareholders who challenged DEI. Major companies began rolling back their DEI programs. Lowe's was one of the first. Now the company says it wants to be a 'unifier.' Citigroup reports it has dropped 'diversity, equity and inclusion' from the title of its talent management team. Home Depot, Google, Goldman Sachs and many others have publicly scrapped hiring goals based on race, ethnicity, sex or gender. It's a big change from the recent past, when a young white man graduating from college had to worry that internships and training programs at the big financial institutions and other corporate giants wouldn't consider him because of his race and gender. But it's good news for everyone, not just him. The six decades of concocted preferences since Martin Luther King's famous 'content of their character' speech and the harm these preferences caused should teach us that treating people differently based on the group they belong to is a mistake. Discrimination — no matter the group and however well-intentioned — inflicts new injustices. As Ames said, 'We're trying to make this a level playing field for everyone. Not just a white woman in Ohio.' It's also reassuring that the unanimous opinion in Ames was crafted by Justice Jackson, the most liberal member of the court and herself often considered a DEI pick. It's another sign that America may be coming together on the need to end such distinctions altogether, whether invidious or virtuous in intent. Betsy McCaughey is a former lieutenant governor of New York and co-founder of the Committee to Save Our City.
Wall Street Journal
43 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
U.S. Supreme Court 9, Wisconsin Supreme Court 0
Justice Sonia Sotomayor's unanimous opinion last week in favor of a Catholic Charities nonprofit was a good win for religious liberty, and we've already discussed what it says about the Supreme Court. Permit us to add a final thought, which is that the 9-0 decision is a humiliation for the Wisconsin Supreme Court's new 4-3 liberal majority. The state jurists had denied a religious tax exemption to a local diocese's Catholic Charities Bureau (CCB) and associated groups. Their activities were 'secular in nature' and didn't involve teaching the faith or supplying religious materials, the Wisconsin court said. It rejected almost out of hand the First Amendment argument that ultimately won the day.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Canada to hit NATO spending target this year as it shifts defense focus toward EU
Canada will reach NATO's defense spending target of 2% of GDP this year, five years ahead of schedule, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced on June 9. Speaking at the University of Toronto, Carney said the move is part of a strategic pivot away from reliance on the U.S. and toward deeper cooperation with the European Union, citing growing security threats from Russia, China, and other adversaries. Carney said Canada's current military capabilities are inadequate, noting that only one of four submarines is operational and much of the maritime and land fleet is outdated. To reverse this trend, his government is launching a $6.8 (9.3 billion Canadian dollars) boost to the defense budget for 2025-26. The investment will be tabled in Parliament through supplementary estimates and directed toward rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces, upgrading equipment, and expanding domestic production capabilities. The new defense posture includes reassessing major procurement decisions, such as the planned purchase of U.S.-made F-35 jets, and prioritizing partnerships with European firms for equipment acquisitions. Carney emphasized that three-quarters of Canada's defense capital spending has gone to the U.S., a pattern he said must end. "We're doing this for us," Carney was quoted as saying. "Relatedly we're doing it as a strong NATO partner, we're a firm believer in NATO, and we're standing shoulder to shoulder with our NATO allies, we'll continue to do so. ." Carney's announcement comes just ahead of the NATO leaders' summit in late June, where member states are expected to commit to higher defense spending thresholds of up to 5%. The prime minister said Canada would support a new NATO defense industrial pledge and participate in the EU's ReArm Europe initiative. He added that future cooperation with the EU will be a major theme of the upcoming Canada-EU summit. Read also: Ukraine war latest: Ukraine shoots down nearly 500 drones, missiles in Russian record strike, Air Force says We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
