YOU’VE got to agree –it’s a strange old world. Nowhere more so than in politics. Here we have Jeremy Corbyn, who, it is said, favoured Britain leaving the EU. But he gave lukewarm support to Remain – and now might be ousted as Labour leader.

And there is Teresa May. She also, it is said, was a closet EU leaver. But she too insipidly supported Remain. And now, unchallenged, she’s firmly in No 10. The Mad Hatter’s Tea party couldn’t rival it.

Mrs May’s inaugural speech as PM was another dazzling demonstration of sleight of hand. Most commentators judged it a job well done – but it said virtually nothing about the reason Mrs May stood outside No 10 – Brexit. Her speech could have been made after any general election. “A country that works for all, blah, blah, blah.” Only when rounding off did she reach the issue that had vaulted her to power: “We are living through an important moment in our history.”

Yes, and since, post-referendum, Mrs May had at least twice insisted “Brexit means Brexit” you might have expected her to state explicitly her determination to implement it. Maybe even “as quickly as possible”. But she merely sidled up to the subject – and glided smoothly past: “As we leave the European Union we will forge a bold new positive role.” And that was it for the “important moment” - the penultimate sentence in her speech.

It is now being asked, what exactly does Mrs May mean by “Brexit means Brexit”. I wish she’d prefaced the remark with “watch my lips”. Then we could be absolutely sure that “Brexit means Brexit” might very well not mean that at all.

And so to Andrea Leadsom. I was immensely impressed with her during the referendum. But she wrecked her Tory leadership chances by appearing to suggest she would make a better PM than Mrs May because she had children. Forgivingly, Mrs May has placed her in charge of Defra – Department of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. Farmers – and others – should be on their guard. Hinting that farm subsidies could be replaced by “environmental credentials” she said recently: “It would make so much more sense if those with the big fields do the sheep and those with the hill farms do the butterflies.” Presumably she doesn’t realise that the landscape of the hill farms, beloved of millions, a prime antidote to urban stress, is chiefly the product of sheep.

NOT a million miles from that issue is the thorny question of Dales Barns – unused today but a vital component of the landscape. An anonymous benefactor has bequeathed cash to restore 600 in Swaledale. Would he/she have done so had they known that the national park authority was, for the first time, allowing roadside barns outside villages to be converted into homes? According to the authority’s chairman, Carl Lis, this “simply continues the existing policy, albeit expanded to many more barns.” But Peter Stockton, the park’s head of sustainable development, says: “This is quite a substantial change. “We are now allowing houses in very isolated locations.”

Despite laudably restricting occupancy to locals, this could be highly damaging to the appearance of the Dales.