I am more than curious if anyone of you have done a 180 or changed their minds since the original Brexit vote??

Or even been nudged right or left??

That's a perfectly fair question. Donuel, but I can only answer for myself. I certainly haven't 180-ed. I doubt very many people do on any topic, but as you say it can happen. Those who do tend to be true zealots for whatever they have switched to, on the few occasions I have met them.

Have I moved further left? To some extent. I have voted for Conservatives in the past on a few occasions. Two that spring to mind: the local Tory MP was hard working and very involved in the local community. He really did his best to work for the constituency and I think that important. So I was happy to let him continue that in the next election. On another occasion I voted against my ward's Labour MP and for the person I thought most likely to defeat him (who was a fairly moderate tory). That MP was a rubber stamp: He voted on party lines 100% of the time and showed not one glimmer of independent thought. That is not how I think a constituency should be represented.

So imagine I was in that position today. Would I have voted for them? Most likely not. Not that my views of them would differ, but that the issue at stake is too great. And I am not just talking Brexit: I mean things like what is becoming known as the 'page 48' issue where the Conservatives appear to be trying to centralise all power in the Executive's hands, weakening Parliament, the courts, the Lords …

Am I far left? Definitely not by European wide standards I am very moderate. While nowhere is perfect, of course, I reckon the Scandinavian countries tend to do things a lot better than we do.

In so far as I am Tory, I am a one nation Tory. By which I mean when deciding whether to do something - support a factory for example - you look at the factory, and the businesses around it, and the impact on costs to the country of people becoming unemployed and so on, and assess the impact on the whole of the UK when making your decision. I contrast this with a mode of thought that asks if that factory is viable in its own right? If not, tough, and we will not think about any consequences for the rest of the country.


I can illustrate this with a discussion I had with Teribus some years back. Someone had mentioned EU airlines have to pay compensation to passengers if it is cancelled and he was strongly against this: it is up to the airline to consider its profitability and cancel or not in line with that. (As it happens, that is how it is done in many parts of the world.)

That is classic free market thinking, not One Nation.

A One Nation Tory says that for destinations apart from holiday makers, almost all the passengers on the plane are businessmen. And they are flying to conferences, to sales presentations, to trade shows and so on. And if they don't show, they are very likely to lose business. The trade show is on the Wednesday: there is no point showing up on the Thursday instead.

So the One Nation Tory says 'how do we share the risk?' And they do so by letting the airlines have a slightly higher fare so it includes a sort of insurance component to cover any refunds that arise. But the refunds required means the point at which it is economic to cancel the plane changes, so they are more likely to fly and these salesmen to get to the trade show and the UK gets more income. That's One Nation thinking.