MPs took part in a debate that was not pursuant to passing any law, nor in response to an immediate crisis, but one that was occasioned by the decision of the Prime Minister to revisit one of the most damaging and divisive topics in our recent history.
The topic was Brexit, and Andy Burnham’s so-called “reset”, otherwise characterised as a personal determination to place the terms of our departure and the conditions of re-entry back on the table for discussion.
That he has voluntarily reopened this wound beggars belief.
Regular readers will know that I personally voted to remain in 2016.
But, respecting the democratic outcome of the vote, I have always considered it my duty to focus on the future and help this country reap the advantages of our freedom, some of which have yet to be fully realised.
It is absurd that, instead of focusing on what is likely to be a painful upcoming budget and seeking to fix Britain’s economy after the damage it has sustained in the last two years, Labour is reverting to type.
They do not understand how to promote growth by unleashing the power of entrepreneurialism, so will always want to cling as closely as possible to the high tax and big government model of the European Union.
Leaving the EU involved economic adjustments, but the impact figures that are bandied about are predicated on an unchanged growth trajectory and assume hypothetical ongoing conditions that, thanks to events such as the Ukraine war and the global pandemic, never actually existed.
In any case, growth in UK since 2016 is higher than France, Germany, and Italy over the same period, and is even predicted to be marginally higher next year too.
In addition, I would argue that some of the immediate effects of Brexit can in fact be attributed to the extended period of uncertainty that accompanied the vote.
I vividly remember thinking straight after the vote that I never wanted to go through anything that bitterly divisive again.
To choose to plunge us back into limbo, with all the chaos and recriminations that come with it, without any certainty that the door is even open, let alone on acceptable terms, seems like madness to me.
We risk ending up in the worst of all worlds – on the outside when it comes to decision making, but unable to take advantage of our country’s potential, as well as ceding control of all our food laws to the EU.
Back in Salisbury, my many engagements include the latest meeting of the Pride in Place board, an invitation to Salisbury District Hospital to show appreciation for the vital work of A&E departments, and a flying visit to Rockbourne Fair to meet local stallholders and craftspeople and start some early Christmas shopping.