DURING this extended period of political uncertainty in the UK commentators and politicians have drawn deeply from an old lexicon for some familiar words and phrases. “Chaos” and “confusion” are probably the most common of these, followed by “turbulence”. Following Theresa May’s great Brexit retreat on Tuesday I heard “mayhem” and “shambolic”. As for myself, regrettably I’ve not been immune from writers’ tendency to heighten the drama with their own favourite usages. I must try to avoid using the word “apocalypse” in connection with Brexit ... for a while anyway.

In most other situations we could all reasonably be accused occasionally of deploying a degree of hyperbole to exaggerate a sense of drama. With Brexit though, most of the words and phrases are entirely justified and often are not in themselves sufficient to convey what is happening in Westminster and in the country beyond.

The BBC showed pictures of Theresa May on Tuesday morning meeting the Dutch Prime Minister at The Hague, presumably to obtain some early indication of whether the EU will move significantly to alleviate her of her Northern Ireland backstop burden. Later, in a little cameo which cruelly mocked her Brexit predicament we also saw her encountering some challenges attempting to exit her car ahead of her meeting with the German chancellor Angela Merkel. Neither of them or any of their EU colleagues offered any indication that they are likely to respond positively to her late, late distress call.

For two years they have been treated with open contempt and disdain by an assortment of Tory grotesques such as David Davis, Boris Johnson and Liam Fox. Davis, the former Brexit Secretary, rarely even favoured them with his presence, leaving his civil servants to do all the chiselling and fluffing. The three Brexit amigos took it in turns to mock the EU and sometimes to threaten them. They were openly playing to the gallery where once sat the Daily Mail, The Telegraph, The Sun and The Express. “We won’t let Johnny Foreigner push us around,” they were saying. Now these European leaders are being treated with contempt once more. They have dealt patiently with these insufferably arrogant Tories for two years of painstaking negotiation and are now being asked to change their minds by a woman they hardly ever saw.

Lately, though, the gallery has looked a little depleted as the Government’s own post-Brexit economic forecasts have started to look bleak. No-one is mocking or threatening now. Instead, there is only embarrassment and humiliation. Those who voted to leave the EU on the delusion of restoring Britain to some former undefined greatness must be finding it difficult to comprehend what is unfolding before them.

In particular, the sight of the Prime Minister of Great Britain knocking meekly at the doors of these Europeans desperately seeking alms at Christmas must be distressing to them.

It has now come down to this. The leader of the UK must humiliate herself and the country she leads to appease the whims of 10 members of the Democratic Unionist Party. They represent an artificially contrived state (itself a perverse, geopolitical backstop) which was established largely to maintain the social and religious advantages of one community over another. The great European project was created as a bulwark against these wretched old ways. So, perhaps it’s appropriate that the rest of the UK feels it must leave the EU and that it did so fuelled by a campaign which drew heavily on the values that helped create Northern Ireland.

In Westminster the post-EU future of the UK is just one among several plots that are being played out here.

The hard right of the Conservative and Unionist Party manufactured and manipulated Brexit to gain power in the country. These same people are now using the uncertainty that has ensued to bring about their desired end-game. This is the removal of Theresa May as Prime Minister and the rebirth of a 19th-century entity, isolated from the world and at the mercy of Tory corporate donors who lust after 19th-century employment practices on their factory floors. Let’s not be in any doubt here: what was laid bare at Westminster on Monday was the early stages of a Conservative party leadership contest. All the main contenders share a common purpose: to sacrifice the future wellbeing of the majority of UK citizens to their own personal career ambitions and the whims of Jacob Rees-Mogg and his 1722 committee.

The National:

Corbyn fails miserably to oppose May

I’M struggling to understand why the Labour leadership is afraid of moving a vote of no-confidence in the Prime Minister. Their thinking seems to arise from a fear that Conservative MPs will rally round the Prime Minister in such a scenario to prevent the spectre of a General Election. This may be so but there are several hard-line Brexiteers in the Rees-Mogg faction who have already pledged their determination to force the Prime Minister out, regardless.

In the event of recalcitrant Tories opting to save their leader’s skin a confident Labour Party would make hay with this.

They would remind voters that while these Tories were perfectly willing to flirt with the prospect of a ruinous no-deal scenario simply to preserve the DUP’s ancient prejudices, none would be willing to risk their own careers and salaries in a snap General Election.

Never would the essential selfishness of the Tories have been so openly exposed. This is a party which preaches patriotism but which has always put its own narrow interests – usually fuelled by greed and a lust for power – before those of the country. Labour, though, has failed miserably to construct any meaningful opposition to Theresa May’s Brexit strategy and has been devoid of leadership throughout the past two years, a period which has tested Jeremy Corbyn’s credentials as a leader-in-waiting. Unfortunately, on the most important political issue of our generation, the Labour leader has been hesitant and unconvincing.

The National:

What’s the point of Willie Rennie?

AMONG the minor ancillary benefits of having a Scottish Parliament is that it creates a few jobs for those who claim to be Scottish LibDems. In Holyrood’s voting system the LibDems are always guaranteed a quantity of seats, even though no-one has ever been able to identify a meaningful policy belonging to them.

I’ve often thought that if you fancied having a wee go at being a Holyrood politician the simplest route would be through the LibDem selection process. Simply turn up; look the part with corduroys and Harris tweeds and be vaguely sympathetic to ideas about inclusion, diversity and the environment. With a measure of eloquence and confidence you’d find yourself sitting behind Willie Rennie in the chamber before you could say: “I’m raising a petition for sustainable food choices in the canteen.”

Scottish LibDem leader Rennie did little to dispel this perception last week when he named his price for his party’s backing of the SNP’s budget. Rennie sought from the SNP “a short cessation in their independence campaign”. Perhaps the SNP could shorten their name to the SP for an agreed period of time, say six weeks. Reports that he’s asking the Scottish Greens to cease with their obsession about air travel and become – oh I don’t know – the Scottish Purples, are as yet unconfirmed.