There's not much humour about Brexit / Brexodus. The most memorable story for me is still from 1975 when we had an IN / OUT vote and the Conservative party was all enthused about staying IN, and Labour was for OUT. This was 41 years ago this week. Happy days.
In one of the many debates in parliament an MP criticised a fellow member for his indecision on the question. It went something like this:
"The Honourable gentleman can't make up his mind. First he's in, then he's out. In, out. In, out. This is the politics of coitus interruptus"
After the stunned silence that followed this gross breach of parliamentary protocol (ie, mentioning copulation), a voice from the Conservative shires shouted
"Withdraw!"
No such fun this time. It's probably all too existential. Thanks, then, to Martin Vander Weyer in this week's Spectator who lives in fracking country (near Kirby Misperton, in God's own county) and is always being pestered for his opinion. He has managed to compile a response to pollsters whether they are enquiring about fracking or Brexodus by saying:
"Of course, the risks are higher if we do it than if we don't, but so are the potential rewards, including the independence it would give us. Just don't believe the scare stories ..."
I am tempted to use the acronym for laugh out loud but I can't bring myself to!
Neither can I bring myself to decide whether I am in or out! I would really like the kind of debate that stops talking about money and starts talking about principles (and not the principles of association either!) and potentialities.