Iain Duncan Smith’s self-serving view of Brexit shows how politics has changed recently

Send your letters to letters@independent.co.uk

Supporters wave Union flags at the countdown to Brexit in Parliament Square (AFP/Getty)

It is always good to see The Independent giving a voice to people of all political persuasions but I take issue with the article written by Iain Duncan Smith on Saturday.

He claims that as “ideological Remainers” the Labour leadership team misread the mood of the country. However, while I feel that Jeremy Corbyn has been a disaster for both Labour and the campaign to remain, is it not true that the vagaries of our voting system delivered a Conservative majority from only 29 per cent of the electorate. Hardly proof that their mantra of “get Brexit done” was supported by a majority of us.

As for Mr Duncan Smith’s proposition that we must be prepared to crash out of trade talks with the EU, where will that get us if we turn our backs on what represents 40 per cent of our current trade? Won’t it mean we simply have less leverage when it comes to the USA’s demand to put the NHS on the table or to accept their chlorinated chickens?

However, what I take most exception to is Duncan Smith’s claim that the government must deliver for those who voted Conservative for the first time. His use of the phrase “blue collar voters” says is all: they’re really not like us but we must give them some sops so they vote for us again. Who, Mr Duncan Smith, was it that destroyed the places where these people live and has left them with no prospects? I don’t think that the levels of immigration you cite had a lot to do with it. Rather, it has been 10 years of ideologically-driven Tory austerity by governments that you have been part of – and it includes the introduction of disastrous policies such as universal credit, of which you were the architect despite refusing to take responsibility for the agony it has caused people.

Finally, Mr Duncan Smith’s conclusion that “The future for Conservatives is bright...” reflects everything that is wrong with our politics. For too long it has been about self-serving, short-termism with politicians like IDS failing to govern for the benefit of all its citizens. Instead they keep their eye on the prize of re-election. They want power for its own sake and as we have seen in the whole Brexit debacle, they will manipulate any sector of the public to achieve it.

Jane Mogford
Cirencester

Thoughts from Parliament Square

In my view, the BBC was consistent to the last: downplaying the celebration in Parliament Square. I was approximately in the middle of the throng, surrounded by tens of thousands of people. Yet there was no aerial view to show the effect of the numbers. Nor in news reports that I saw was there recognition of the singing of “Land of Hope and Glory”. But viewers were clearly presented with the rendition of “Auld Lang Syne” from the apparently smaller Edinburgh crowd gathered to mourn Brexit.

All that said, I had mixed feelings in Parliament Square. Without question of gloating I celebrated – as I’d wanted to our departure from the European Union. but I was reminded of Terence Rattigan’s line in Separate Tables: ”The trouble with aligning yourself to a cause is that you so often have to associate with such disagreeable people.”

Edward Thomas
Eastbourne

A view from Brussels

It is extraordinary to read some of the descriptions of the UK’s recent departure from the EU coming from the British media. May I suggest the image that is seen as most appropriate in Brussels?

Imagine that you are hosting a party for 28 people. One of them has perhaps had a little too much to drink, is proving awkward, and as with any tipsy guest you try to calm him down a bit. It turns out he wants to decide the menu for himself – you let him order exactly what he wants. He then says he couldn’t choose what plate to eat his food from. You let him choose his plate. But all to no avail as he gets more and more unsteady.

He has moments of anger and moments when he endlessly repeats himself as he forgets what he’s just said. It seems that he can talk of nothing else but his dislike of the food and anger at the fact he can’t make his own. In the end, after a long period when he has one foot in the door and one out, he manages to stagger outside.

Relief all round. A bit of clearing up to do. Of course he will be back when he finds it impossible to make his own food properly, but he doesn’t have the right to attend the feast any more.

Dr Mark Corner
Brussels

Visions of Europe

Nick Kell (Letters, 1 February) suggests that Brexiteers “like to go back to an imagined past of imperial superiority”. As one who has tried to avoid the vitriolic and sound and fury of the debate, and tried to listen to what both sides have been saying, I don’t recognise that description of myself as a marginal Brexiteer. The past is, of course, important, and the Brexit arguments can be traced back to Henry VIII, because the fundamental question then as now is: “Who rules Britain?”

MPs are loaned their authority from the electorate for five-year terms and that authority cannot be transferred to any third party that is not answerable to the UK’s parliament, and therein lies the problem. A country cannot be governed by two parliaments or, in the case of the EU, a national parliament in the UK and a technocracy of civil servants, accountable to no one, in Brussels.

There are really two visions of Europe in play here: one is the continuation of a quasi-state that undermines national legislatures, and the other is of a very flexible Europe that cooperates with other nation states with it but is not ruled by them. My view is that the latter is the safest and most productive model for the future.

Lyn Atterbury
Pila

Balance and thoughtfulness

After reading Nick Kell’s letter, I really wished for a “like” button.

A very thoughtful and balanced piece of work. You should offer him a job.

D Leddy
Chertsey

High praise

One of the reasons I subscribe to The Independent, apart from it being the most honest and unbiased newspapers, is because of the excellent journalists and commentators you have. I may not always agree with what they say, but often they open me to looking at a subject from another point of view and changing my perspective of it.

However, I have been astounded at the brilliantly truthful dissections of the following by Tom Peck: Piers Morgan, Brexit, Farage and Widdecombe, and the SNP.

Long may your journalists continue to shine in these greyest of days.

Ken Twiss
Yarm

Oh, Canada

Much is being said about a “Canada-style” free trade deal with the EU, but somehow the discussion rarely extends to any assessment of the economic value of any such deal.

Perhaps that is because its proponents know that it would hardly be worth the bother?

Dr DR Cooper
Maidenhead