Brexit is and was an English Nationalist project. Many Brexiteers are viscerally anti-Scots and openly contemptuous of the distinctive nation north of the border. Whilst they wave the Union Flag at every opportunity they forget that the flag of St Andrew is a part of it. They laud Britishness when it suits them but in reality what they actually mean is little old England.

To leave Europe was in essence driven by Little Englanders. The Scots mostly wanted none of it and are understandably aggrieved that they are being taken out of the European Union against their will. Meanwhile most countries in the EU see Scotland as they see themselves – historic nations with the same right to self determination that they have. The exception is Spain where the Catalans have as strong a case as the Scots for an independence that their central Government is unwilling to concede them.

The combination of a majority for independence north of the border and a sympathetic EU should settle the matter. The case for the Union is rarely made as a patriotic case for Britain but usually as an accountants’ case for the financial benefits that it brings to Scotland. The EU knows this and can comfortably underwrite financial subsidies to support the Scots breakaway from England. They will delight in doing it as well ! They’ll find a way to placate the Spanish and bring them on board I expect.

For the English like me who know Scotland well (I lived there for many years) the prospect of an independent Scotland in the EU is very appealing. Scotland has a far stronger unitary culture than England without the regional divides and metropolitan domination that characterise England. Whereas xenophobia is rife south of the border Scotland has never struck me as being anti other nationalities, except the English of course.

The United Kingdom is a relatively modern concept but it has outlived its usefulness in a post Brexit world. Whereas the myth of membership of the EU being a threat to British Sovereignty was bunkum the fact of the U.K. denying Scotland sovereignty is very real. As, of course, is the fact of the Union standing in the way of the inescapable and righteous logic of a reunited Ireland. I doubt that the Welsh will be far behind in going for independence either. Wales is a perfectly credible independent state in the EU which comfortably includes nations as small as Malta or Cyprus. Even, effectively, Gibraltar!

The break up of the United Kingdom may be an unintended consequence of Brexit, but it shouldn’t have been a surprise. I doubt that Scottish and Welsh independence, and Irish reunification, would have happened without Brexit but they now seem inevitable. Whoever is Prime Minister when all this happens better make sure that they have enough flags of St George in stock to put behind the podium when the make the announcements,

“One of the most dishonest smears from angry Remainers in June 2016 was that in voting against a trading and administrative bloc, every Brexit voter was not just venomously racist but was rejecting the Renaissance, the Enlightenment, Mozart, Marie Curie, Van Gogh, alpenhorns and proper patisserie.” Libby Purves in “The Times” today.

The sad reality is that the average Brexit voter wouldn’t have a clue what Libby Purves is talking about in her excellent article. The referendum didn’t operate at the level of Goethe or Van Gogh but at the level of Nigel Farage. Yes that’s the same Farage as the man with a European name, ancestors and a German wife. I don’t think Farage mentioned the Renaissance once and those that voted for his malignant ideology wouldn’t have heard of it.

I’m a member of the metropolitan middle class elite. A product of a good education, career and a fair dollop of good luck. I’ve been to La Scala and the Philharmonie and the Louvre and walked in The Alps. I’ve lived for some years on the “continent “ and speak one European language fluently and others a bit. I have pride in being European. This is not a boast , simply an illustration of a divide. People like me were outnumbered and out thought in the reductio ad absurdum of the “Leave” campaign.

In a battle in the gutter with a mendacious message on a bus and Farage standing in front of a xenophobic poster Mozart didn’t get much of a look in. We Britons are, of course, genetically, historically, culturally and emotionally European. But not all of us knew it and some of those who did – Boris Johnson for one – ignored tradition and reality to lie for their own advantage. They’re still at it.

Max Hastings , in The Times today, with his wonderful gift for making modern history comprehensible to the non professional reader may one day try and explain in more detail all our current madness. For now he seems as bewildered as most of us. Michael Gove, a modern day Jim Jones in the same newspaper puffs and blows his pseudo-patriotic guff whilst pouring out the Kool Aid – but he doesn’t explain either.

The reality is that the causes of collective madness are hard to grasp. Read the story of how scores of adults drank the lethal Kool Aid in the Guyanese jungle. We know what happened, but why? No idea. Brexit makes no rational sense. But like in Jonestown does that mean it cannot be explained? Maybe it should be – 52% of the referendum voters drank the Kool Aid.

The lethal affect of this insanity is now around the corner. It would help to know how we got here. The point about the “tribal identity” Max Hastings refers to is that it isn’t our recent identity but one that harps back seventy years – and much more. That England was Imperial and genuinely “Great Power” in character. But it was already slipping away. As Dean Acheson told us in 1962 we had lost an Empire but not yet found a role.

In “Nemesis” Max Hastings describes poignantly how ineffective the Royal Navy was in the latter stages of WW2 in the Far East theatre. The baton had been passed to America and GB wasn’t even a bit part player. Without the Empire Britain became largely irrelevant on the world stage. “Global Britain” was an anachronism in 1960. Today it is embarrassingly preposterous.

The future stippled out for us as one of the leaders of a modernising and uniting Europe seemed for a time to have been understood, if not embraced. But now we’ve cast that aside in favour of…what? Search me.

We may rescue some “soft power” not just in the Grantchester tea rooms but in science and tourism and The Arts and Sport. But we won’t actually make anything to speak off and it seems that even our vibrant financial services sector will slip away to Frankfurt or Dubai.

The thought of Priti Patel, clip board in hand, checking whether a aspirant migrant from Poland or Paris or Prague meets her criteria should put them all off to good.

Michael Gove in The Times today waffles on incoherently about the post Brexit opportunities for Britain. Well one of the architects of Brexit would say all this wouldn’t he ? But it’s bunkum – none of the fictitious “benefits” of Brexit Gove lists is substantial or even true. Just vague pseudo-patriotic puffery revealed in those oft-repeated words “Take Back Control”. The truth, an alien concept to this man and his cohorts, is that we never lost it.

The “deal” announced with such self-congratulatory bombast illustrates why no nation , and certainly no European nation, is independent in the modern world. The deal restricts Britain’s freedoms and constrains our independence of action. It is Brino – Brexit in name only – if by Brexit you mean taking back control as Gove claims here.

The 21st Century world is interdependent like never before. In Europe partners created a structure to both acknowledge this interdependence and to further it. “Ever closer Union” – the antithesis of “Take Back Control” – does involve some surrender of sovereignty but does that make any one of the 30 nations either in the EU or closely allied to it any less of a nation? Of course not.

Michel Barnier described the “deal” as being “Lose/Lose” and, of course, he was right. Europe and Britain are both the poorer for it. Those of us who have travelled extensively across mainland Europe and the continent’s more geographically disconnected members (all in the EU) do so to relish the differences. Countries like (say) Finland and Croatia are no less Finnish nor Croatian for being in the EU. And nor was Britain if only we’d seen it.

EU membership gave we Brits benefits unthinkable to previous generations. The right to live, work and travel freely across thirty countries should never have been surrendered. There is no more symbolic representation of Union than this – but it is so much more. Economically, socially, culturally and emotionally the “Four Freedoms” said, rightly, that no modern man is an island entire in itself. And nor is the nation of which he is a citizen.

After 1st January the only way is up. But the medium term outcomes of Brexit look extremely hazardous for the United Kingdom. The viability of Scotland as an independent nation in the EU is very much enhanced by Brexit. The EU27 won’t have to dig too deeply into their pockets to smooth the way. It will happen. No doubt the Welsh will do the same. And if the Northern Irish can bury their sectarian differences, as they did when they signed the Good Friday Agreement, then a reunited independent Ireland is another certain outcome.

So what of Little England ? Sad, silly and adrift we will be a museum of the past. Clinging on to our past “triumphs” waving a flag of a Union that no longer exists and in terminal decline. The Celts will soon forget us, they never liked us much anyway.

In his seminal business book “In Search of Excellence” Tom Peters described the main characteristics of successful companies. One of them was that they tended to “Stick to the knitting”. There are few better examples of this than Shell.

In my 40 years with Shell as an employee and later as a Trustee Director of the British pension fund I saw how good we were at things within our areas of experience and competence. And how bad at diversification. The exploration for and exploitation of hydrocarbons, oil and gas, was what we did. And we did it well. All the way from the well head to the petrol station we were on top of our game. You could be “Sure of Shell” all the way along the supply chain.

But get out of our comfort zone we were hopeless. The list of failed step out activities is a long one – from Nuclear Energy in the 1960s to the latest “Shell Energy” farrago we simply did not know what we were doing. We failed in metals with “Billiton”. We failed in electricity generation with “Powergen”. We failed in coal, forestry, solar and wind. The list is a long one.

The idea that Shell could run a Broadband business is quite preposterous – we couldn’t run an operation marketing Gas to commercial/industrial customers an area where you’d think we had some relevant competences. “Shell Energy” aimed at the domestic gas market, is yet another step out too far.

The success of Shell, the reason that Shell shares have always been a blue chip investment, is that we looked after what we knew best. We had geologists, engineers, rig builders, tanker captains, pipeline experts, oil traders – even a few marketers like me. And lots of accountants. We did our core competencies well. And we invested so much in the Oil and Gas business that for a time Shell was the worlds largest commercial capital investor – in any sector.

When we were good we were very good, but when we were bad we were awful. We once ran a corporate tv commercial lauding our involvement in Forestry which included the line “One Day it may be our biggest business”. We withdrew from Forestry the following year!

The future of the energy sector as demands to get greener and move away from hydrocarbons is complex but the reality is that the only thing that Shell brings to the Renewables table is money. There is no corporate memory on renewables just as there clearly wasn’t for domestic gas. You can buy a gas marketing company, as Shell did, but that doesn’t mean you have the competence to run it.

Can you be “Sure of Shell” any more? Only where they “stick to their knitting”.

There is an interview with Britain’s top soldier in The Times today. Much of it is silly “Britain contra mundom” fantasy – grotesque and silly exceptionalism. The decline in numbers of our Armed Forces is recorded and NATO gets a brief mention. But the reality is that it is only as a part of alliances that the U.K. matters at all. We do not need to be a major military power in our own right and haven’t been for decades. Of course when Russia is militarily strong and on Europe’s borders it needs to be kept in check. But that is not a concern for Britain alone.

new European defence model is urgently needed and, despite Brexit, Britain needs to be part of it. A European Defence Force (EDF), politically accountable to the EU and to the European Parliament, is the way forward. That’s direct accountability not the accountability by proxy of NATO.

If Russia is in our backyard it is not the only global threat – but again we need to get real. Britain alone can do nothing about Iran or China or North Korea all arguably real threats to global peace. Sending gunboats to the South China Sea to protest about Hong Kong is as laughable as it is pointless. Being a division of America’s military might in Iraq, when our European neighbours sensibly kept their distance, was surely the last instance of Britain’s delusion of independent military significance.

If the Falklands was invaded again we certainly couldn’t defend it on our own. And there are no other distant possessions that we could defend either. Our global role, on our own, and our ability to be able to assemble a task force has gone and will not return.

Threats need to be met first and foremost with diplomacy not with weapons. But it helps to carry a big stick. The gunboats near Hong Kong and the ludicrous threat to use them to defend our fishing rights close at home were utterly preposterous. The stick was barely visible and waving it made us look ludicrous.

When there was an empire to defend then Britain did need to rule the waves. Today in retreat in our lonely island offshore of Europe and isolated from it we may posture about military significance – but the reality is we have none. Except , of course, with our allies. We should play an appropriate and active part in NATO and in due course in an EDF. We have a lot to offer as part of an alliance – nothing at all as a flag-waving faux great power stick in the past.

There are plenty of illustrations of Britain’s laughing stock status in the modern world. Our utter failure to complete major infrastructure projects on time, on budget or at all (in some cases) is one of them. In layman’s language we just faff around.

Whilst most of Europe has joined Japan and, more recently China, in having high speed rail networks we have just one short line in Kent. Whilst cities from Dubai to Berlin have modern airports London has four ageing ones each in the wrong place with inadequate capacity and little or no coordination (and no transport) between them.

Pessimism about future air travel is misplaced. Whilst the pandemic has reduced demand this is surely a temporary blip. And when demand turns up again, as it will, London will be ill-equipped to cope. I lived in Hong Kong in the 1980s when the planning for a major new airport was underway. It was delivered ten years later an island having been reconfigured to make way for it !

LHR has always been a hub airport with long distance travellers frequently changing planes there. This generates income both for the airlines that operate out of it and for the nation. Inadequate capacity drives this traffic away – to Amsterdam or Paris and in the future, one suspects, to Berlin whose new airport has just opened.

Of course Little England may drive demand away if the worst happens and Brexit tanks our economy. But if the presumption is that somehow we will weather the storm of our isolation one way or another we will need substantially increased airport capacity for our capital city. If a brand new high capacity airport is ruled out then a third runway at Heathrow and a second one at Gatwick will be essential. Let’s get on with it.

The Government announcement (in today’s The Times) regarding the banning of gas boilers in new homes demonstrates a profound lack of understanding of energy supply.

1. It is extremely unlikely that there will be a significant number of hydrogen powered boilers within the timescales shown . To change the gas supply network from natural gas to hydrogen is theoretically possible but it would be prohibitively expensive and logistically complex. You could create a small number of new estates with localised hydrogen fired heating from their own storage tanks but I would judge this to be unviable.

2. Many of the new gas boilers installed every year at present are retrofit replacements in existing properties. To replace these with heat pumps is unlikely to be practicable in all but a tiny minority of cases.

3. Properties only have oil fired boilers if they are in non gas areas. If a home in such an area needs a new boiler there is no practical alternative but to install a new oil fired one.

4. Brand new properties could be required to have heat pumps and electric rather than gas cookers. But the practicalities of doing this seem not to have been thought through in technical or economic terms. We have little or no collective memory on this subject and even experimental heat pump heated new homes just don’t exist let alone exist any on a commercial scale.

5. Whilst domestic use of gas for heating and cooking in private residences is a major sector there are others. Offices, schools, shops, factories and all public buildings have gas fired heating systems. The scale of this is considerable. Hospitals, for example, have large gas (in some cases oil) fired boilers for which there is no obvious alternative.

Energy policy is complex and understanding it is not helped by headline grabbing announcements which have no practical logic to them.

Outstanding article in The Times today by Matthew Parris about the Madness of King Boris. From the perspective of history, when it comes to be written, this will be seen as a period of national insanity. I remember Suez and the brave voices who spoke up against it – mainly from the Left. Whilst the most guilty men this time are the headbangers of the Tory Right (and beyond) the abject failure of Jeremy Corbyn to honour effectively Labour’s unequivocal 2015 manifesto pledge in favour of Britain in Europe was also culpable.

We know the dangers of rabid Nationalism and the horrors it brought. No British family in the twentieth century was untouched by it. My mother was bombed during the Blitz by the nationalist Nazis whilst my father was a Prisoner, in Siam, of the nationalist Japanese. In my own lifetime I have witnessed raw nationalism still extant in the dying days of the British Empire and in the equally imperial Soviet Union.

The “English exceptionalism” of Boris Johnson is no less than a resurgence of nationalism. It will lead to the break up of the United Kingdom , of course, as similar nationalist forces north of the border secede from the Union. And the Irish will unite, peacefully we must hope. Collateral damage of stupidity, but who can blame the Celts ?

Little England will be like the sad cousin in the family who went off the rails. You know, the one who took to the bottle and is an embarrassment at family gatherings to the extent that he stops being invited. We will sit on the sidelines pathetically waving our faded flag proudly boasting of the recovered sovereignty we never lost. Delusional, demented, daft and drunk. And do you know what might really hurt – no one in the real world will care. Our stock of goodwill will long since have vanished.

There is so much wrong with the effusion of Brexiteer propaganda that is James Forsyth in The Times today it’s hard to know where to start. The best place is to point out the fundamental lie about what the European Union is. The underlying premise is that the EU is some sort of dastardly sovereign entity bent on doing down us noble Brits. But this is nonsense. The negotiations are with senior civil servants accountable to the European Parliament whose sole obligation is to act on behalf of the 27 member States.

If M. Barnier and co. were in some way acting wrongly or irresponsibly don’t you think one of the countries of the Union would say so? None has. If anything the warnings from France and Germany and the rest have been to stick to their guns and make no inappropriate concessions to Britain. This is of course underpinned by those European countries which though not in the EU do have trade deals with the 27 – Switzerland and Norway for example.

The arrogant and ignorant approach of Lord Frost, his preposterous obsession with Sovereignty and his loyalty to the bumbling fool in Downing Street show him to be the third-rate apparatchik he is. I asked a former top civil servant , knight of the realm and friend of mine, about Frost. “Doubt he’d have passed the entrance exam” he said.

To do the wrong thing, for the wrong reasons, at the wrong time, with the wrong people is what we now do as a matter of course. Inadequate politicians who have a clueless disregard for the national interest. A sycophantic governing party in Parliament who collectively spout jingoistic claptrap and are no more than lobby fodder. A compliant media who like Mr Forsyth do their masters bidding. There are no checks and balances and restraints, just faux-patriotism and bombast. And so we have A bumbling fool, a third-rate apparatchik and a rapid decline to irrelevance