The Treaty of Sandhurst

Last week the government concluded a new Treaty with France, called  the “treaty concerning the reinforcement of co-operation for the co-ordinated management of our shared border”. I have called it the Sandhurst treaty, in honour of the place where it was solemnized.

Parliament has recently submitted the EU Withdrawal Bill to intensive scrutiny. Hundreds of amendments have been debated, 45 votes taken on the ones most favoured by the Bill’s opponents, and 12 days of lengthy discussion on a Bill whose main purpose is to ensure continuity of law once we leave the EU in accordance with the instructions of the voters.

I have no problems with Parliament doing its job thoroughly. I want a strong Parliament. What I would now like is for those same Opposition MPs to be equally demanding when it comes  to  other things that are happening.

Lets take last week’s  new Treaty with France. It provides for the UK to send more money to the French government to reinforce the border, and for the UK to take more migrants from France. The government did not offer a Statement or debate to explain this, and are not proposing any Parliamentary process to examine and approve the new Treaty. So why did the Opposition, newly enamoured of the Parliamentary process, not seek an Urgent Question to find out what was going on? Why have they not proposed a debate in Opposition time  if the government does not propose a debate in its time on this matter? Why does the Opposition complain about the Executive needing to have powers to transfer EU laws already agreed into good UK law but have no problem with the government signing a new Treaty with obligations on the UK?

The Treaty of Sandhurst is a development of previous Treaty collaboration on the Anglo French border in France. The underlying principle that it is easiest to police that border for people leaving France in France, and for people leaving the UK in the UK is clearly a good one which we wish to uphold. I still find it odd that the newly active  Opposition forces in Parliament have nothing to say on this and allow the executive to do as they wish without comment or vote.

 

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.

131 Comments

  1. Mark B
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:06 am | Permalink

    Good morning.

    With my comment from yesterday still in moderation, no links and disparaging remarks etc, all I can say is, I really must have said something our kind host does not want people to read – The Truth ! And I guess this short missive will end up the same way. 🤣

    With regard to our kind hosts reference to this treaty I read this :

    15.
    On the Combined Joint Expeditionary Force, we have agreed to build on the success of Exercise Griffin Strike in 2016, in which more than 5,000 personnel from the United Kingdom and France executed major land, sea and air activity for the first time. The CJEF is already capable of operations up to Peace Enforcement and will take forward a programme of work that will deliver a force that could number over 10,000 with Full Operating Capability in crisis management operation involving early entry in a potentially hostile territory by 2020

    It is not the fact that the UK is helping the EU to build up and subsidies its forces, but the fact that the EU through is proxy, France, will use British Armed Forces to enact its own Foreign Policy. Something that I am against. I do not mind working with countries either bilaterally or through the UN as this is transparent, but this is France in the EU dominated by Germany.

    More uncomfortable truth’s that will go unpublished until the debate has moved on.

    😉

    • Mark B
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:09 am | Permalink
      • Hope
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:04 am | Permalink

        Yes Mark, it needs to be stopped. The UK is in NATO and it I suspect clear from govt spending it cannot afford to be in and under control of another EU military pact. This is a clear example of being under the control of the EU. We voted leave. May has already claimed this sort of thing would continue, but she failed to say it would be for nothing in return. Even turn coat Hague raised it this week.

        It should be clear to JR and other MP leavers by now that the untrustworthy May allows remainers like Hammond to speak against govt policy to condition our minds to remain but if the prominent leaver Johnson speaks out in favour of any issue about leaving May shuts him down and it is known he is rebuked. She views him as a threat to her job and a threat to remaining in by another name.

        The game is up JR. All the failures of phase one need to be shouted from the roof tops. It is remaining in by another name. She made this agreement before parliament debated or voted on leaving the EU. Illegal I would suggest. In December we learn Davis not present when Robbins negotiated with Barneir, how is this possible? She was also prepared to be underhand in agreeing the deal. DUP asked for the the details for a week and only hours before she passed it to them! Deceitful underhand behaviour to force the U.K. To stay in the EU by another’s name. Phase one cannot be viewed as anything else. Why would she pay twice the amount of contributions to hold talks to stay in? The sum is undisclosed the period for payments undisclosed. It is not known when the ECJ period starts or where it ends. Regulatory alignment in perpetuity. No need for anything on the Irish border.

        HMRC allowed to be political and target leave donors. This is truly scary. Heads must role. This cannot be allowed.

      • Hope
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:05 pm | Permalink

        May interview yesterday with German paper:
        The vote that the British people took was about our history, about people in the UK wanting to feel that decisions were taken here in the UK.

        We voted leave not wanting to ‘feel’ decisions taken in the UK but ‘are’ taken in the UK. Her view of feel that decisions are taken.. being against govt policy! Laws, money and border being controlled by our govt. What part did she not understand yesterday? Another reason not to believe her.

      • Hope
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

        Davis absolutely appalling during interview with REs-Morgan at the select committee. Rees-Morgan was correct Davis HS agreed to make the U.K. A vassal state during the extension. It cannot be called a transition based on what Davis said. Staying with all pillars of the EU applying without any change and without a voice. This is a set up to prevent us leaving and to use as a demonstration the U.K. Would be better off staying. Disgusting. Oust the govt now. We voted leave. May is providing a technical legal leave in name only, as Hammond described it. She is smearing g Johnson to prevent a prominat leaver ruffling feathers or going against her plan to remain.

        JR watch Davis interview adm there cannot be any doubt May is keeping the U.K. In the EU as a vassal state for at least, as it has not been agreed, another two years. Oust May or bring down the govt.

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:48 am | Permalink

      My relief that this post made was published quickly is palpable.

    • agricola
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:14 am | Permalink

      The other tactic is to not moderate it until the day after when the views might be contentious. It avoids a host of people agreeing with you.

      • alan jutson
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

        agricola

        Agreed.

        That is why I always scroll back a couple of days, which is the longest I have had to wait in moderation, even when the posting has been quite short.

        But its JR’s site, so he can do as he pleases.

        • Narrow Shoulders
          Posted January 25, 2018 at 8:44 am | Permalink

          I think reading through the blogs from a couple of days’ previously is the best way to access this site. The later posts tend to be much more thoughtful and informed. Posters complaining that their thoughts aren’t front and centre irk me. I do enjoy both your posts Alan and agricola but others need to reel their pomposity in.

    • Mitchel
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 10:47 am | Permalink

      Michael Portillo on Andrew Neill’s show last week informed us that the French have their people permanently embedded at the MoD.

      • Martyn G
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

        True – we are closely involved with what I think is destined to morph into the EU Navy. The current HQ of this ‘force’ is in the UK and has been for several years. Could be handy at some point, I suppose – we might need to borrow a carrier with aircraft at some point….

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:24 am | Permalink

      I think you have a good point there. In previous eras we undertook joint military enterprises with the French – Crimea was an obvious early example, although maybe not the earliest – without having to think about how we might be indirectly assisting a quasi-federal EU to project its power, that is throw its weight, around the globe, and eventually perhaps in opposition to our own national interests. I am reminded here of how between the wars we made the mistake of helping Japan to develop the aircraft carriers which they later used against us and our allies.

      • Hope
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

        Of course leaving means a fundamental change in foreign policy and domestic politics from the last 40 years. So it is quite right Johnson is at the heart of every decision being made. Contrary to Hammond’s snide quip yesterday.

        However, he is seen as a threat by remainers. We know this from the hysterical tweet of Soubry claiming he is disloyal and incompetent and needs to be sacked! Soubry who should be deselected for deliberating acting against her constituents wishes, the party, govt and nation. Why has she not been disciplined by the party?

      • Mitchel
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

        E T Howard’s book “Power & Glory:France’s Secret Wars with Britain and America (1945-2016)” is very insightful on recent-ish history.

      • formula57
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

        Without its UK-assisted naval might though, Japan may well not have made the attack on Pearl Harbour with the consequence that the USA would not then (or perhaps at any time) have joined the war against the Nazis. Life is full of unexpected outcomes.

    • Rien Huizer
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:54 pm | Permalink

      What is wrong here? Two NATO countries cooperating . Nothing to do with the EU.

      • Mark B
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

        With respect sir, you clearly are unable to comprehend things beyond that which is in plain sight and has to be spoon fed to you in small digestable morsles.

        The military of any country, be it a sovereign power or a Supranational Government, exists for the purpose of not only defence but, to assist it in the projection of its foreign policy. In the EU’s case that would be the, European External Action Service, the EEAS.

        https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage/area/security-and-defence_en

        All member countries in the EU must take the Common Position in matters of foreign policy.

      • APL
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 12:01 am | Permalink

        “Two NATO countries cooperating ”

        France is of course, a ‘part time’ member of NATO.

        Out when it doesn’t suit France, in when it does.

        Seems, it’s OK for France to dine internationally à la carte.

    • Mark B
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

      I would like to thank our kind host for posting this so promptly.

  2. Lifelogic
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:07 am | Permalink

    Indeed.

    Out of interest how much in total do we pay the French for this (not just the £44 million increase) and how much do they pay the UK for people leaving the UK? Also how many more migrants has the May government actually agreed to take?

    Are the details public yet? I have not heard much about it. Mrs May still seems to be sticking to the “net migration down to the tens of thousands” lie. Yet as Home Secretary for many year she clearly did nothing at all to even attempt work towards this. She even lied to the country during the referendum that we had “control of our borders through not being in Schengen” in order to deceive them into a remain vote.

    She surely must have know this was a blatant lie, or was she daft enough to really believe this?

    • getahead
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:33 pm | Permalink

      Big business wants unlimited immigration. Theresa works for big business and the EU. As does Phil. They have no consideration for the indigenous population.

      • Mark B
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 7:16 am | Permalink

        It is not just immigration. It is also regulation and law. If there is a new market being developed, usually larger companies are slower t see it and act. That leaves the way for smaller business who can take up larger market share and due to small size and keen pricing can keep the market highly competitive. Regulation is therefore used to either stiffle the market with endless red tape which drives up costs and removes smaller competitors. The UK is especially susceptable to this as most companies are SME’s.

  3. Newmania
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:14 am | Permalink

    So how much did it cost us this time to buy soemthing we had already ? This ,. whiule schjoo,s are being savaged with cits and the NHS is dying on its feet …. good work all round and it just gets better

    • Narrow Shoulders
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:46 am | Permalink

      As I recall we continually increase our funding of this border and resisted siren calls from French politicians to move the border while we were fully ensconced within the EU with full “influence”.

      Plus car change which is a lesson those resisting our leaving for the EU and single market would do well to heed.

      • getahead
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:34 pm | Permalink

        Plus ça change ?

        • Narrow Shoulders
          Posted January 25, 2018 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

          Yes

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:35 am | Permalink

      With Remain put in charge of leaving the EU we’re not getting the best deals.

      • Blue and Gold
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

        ……….Mrs. May is acting like a member of UKIP !!!

        • Anonymous
          Posted January 24, 2018 at 10:36 pm | Permalink

          Don’t be silly.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:07 pm | Permalink

          Hardly, she is a socialist, PC, green crap pushing, second rate dope. One who thinks high taxes and punishment manifesto’s are a great idea. She is almost as far removed from a sensible Nigel Farage line as Jeremy Corbyn is.

        • Hope
          Posted January 25, 2018 at 8:42 am | Permalink

          Stupid comment. Most extreme left wing Tory MP ever.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:39 am | Permalink

      So how much money, gross or net, take your pick, do you think have we paid into the EEC/EC/EU since we joined in 1973?

      Any idea? Tens of millions, would it be, or tens of billions?

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/eureferendum/12075046/Britain-has-given-half-a-trillion-pounds-to-EU-since-1973.html

      “The analysis found that in today’s prices Britain has paid £484 billion since joining the European Economic Community in 1973.”

      But however much of that nearly half a trillion – trillion, not billion, not million – was money wasted it was still money well spent according to you.

    • graham1946
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 1:08 pm | Permalink

      Newmania – wrong again. It is nothing to do with the EU so we did not ‘already have it’.

      This is a treaty separate from our membership and is supposed to be in both parties’ interest to deal with illegals. However, my feeling is that this is a French problem alone and nothing to do with the UK. The French let these people into France through their porous borders and the Schengen agreement. The only part we have in it is that the illegals think that the UK is better than the EU (which it is) and that they will get an easy free life (which they probably will). We should tell the French to look after their own problems and not rely on us, but that’s what they always do – it was up to us to save them in WW2.

  4. Duncan
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:18 am | Permalink

    This comes as no surprise to anyone who has followed the career of Theresa May. A politician whose backbone is made of jelly and whose principles are not the principles we look for in a Tory leader

    With regard to this particular treaty with France. We do NOT share a border with France. It is neither a border nor is it a ‘shared border’. That’s political language of the worst kind and deliberately designed to confuse. It suggests another ‘bridge’. It suggests we are not an island.

    This development indicates the mindset of this PM. It reveals who she is and what she is. She wants to be seen to be doing the right thing rather than doing the right thing. She’s little more than a virtue signaller. We don’t want a virtue signaller as PM we want a leader who leads

    Moreover, I believe what we are seeing is a fundamental ethnic realignment in the UK. This will favour the left and Labour. Immigration was used by labour under Blair as a political weapon of slander (race card) against the Tories. They also used immigration to change the ethnic composition of certain areas of the UK which benefit Labour considerably. This can be seen in London today

    I have noticed the same changes in my area. Ethnic displacement has become a subtle political tactic

    I have no problem with people coming here to work. I have no problem with refugees who need our help. I have a major problem with politicians who use immigration for political purposes. Blair used it to boost Labour’s electoral advantage. May’s using it to portray herself as compassionate. She doesn’t want to be seen in the same light as Donald Trump

    What is most worrying is how do we prevent this PM from defying the will of the people? It is obvious she’s decided the UK will pander to the needs of the EU and its dominant member states.

    What can we do to ensure she’s prevented from causing more damage to the UK?

    The question most Tory voters will be asking is why did Tory MP’s vote for Theresa May to lead the Conservative Party?

    I know only one thing. That with this person at the helm the UK is doomed and the Tories damaged

    • The Prangwizard
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:37 am | Permalink

      Well said. There is a real problem here which needs to be tackled.

    • nhsgp
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:57 am | Permalink

      I have no problem with people coming here to work.
      =====
      There are conditions

      1. No criminals
      2. Net contributors only
      3. No discrimination

      The UK government fails on all 3

      • Iain Gill
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

        Not when there is already an oversupply of Brits with those skills.

        • Rien Huizer
          Posted January 25, 2018 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

          And what are these peoplpe doing right now? Are they in the right location? Are they willing to work? Etcetera. Foreign labour is not always cheap. One exception: illegal immigrants (ie different from foreigners who have a right to reside and work) They are cheap and obedient. And those who hire them are criminal. Unfortunately, lots of businesses rely on them.

      • Andy
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

        Gosh – if you use those three criteria we could kick an awful lot of Brexit voters out.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:00 pm | Permalink

        People coming and working on or around the minimum wage pay far less in tax than they cost in schooling, new housing, in work benefits, policing, the NHS and all the rest.

        They also depress the wages of other workers – very significantly in some sectors. They also tend to send money home rather than spending it locally.

        • Iain Gill
          Posted January 25, 2018 at 7:18 am | Permalink

          Far higher than minimum wage when they displace a Brit from the workforce.

    • Hope
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:19 am | Permalink

      Duncan, it is worse than you think. I was present at a meeting where the govt service provider claimed the Labour Govt was aware the south east public services could not cope and consequently wanted to disperse around the country! The govt knew in 2002/3 that public services could not cope. Why has the Tory Govt done nothing about it? 15 years on it cannot be a surprise to them why the country is overwhelmed and unable to cope with the mass immigration policy both Labour and Tory has pursued!

    • L Jones
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:31 am | Permalink

      Duncan – once again, well said! As you point out, this attitude is damaging the Tory party. This cannot be one person working alone (ie Mrs May) and it is disturbing that not enough voices are raised to speak up for us, the public, when MPs and their civil servants must KNOW the anxiety we feel as a whole when these obviously alarming decisions are taken quietly and unobtrusively.

    • Man of Kent
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:56 am | Permalink

      We know Gove knifed Boris , Andrea backed down leaving a clear run in for TM given the number of Remain Conservative MPs.
      I agree with your piece but who do we vote for now ?
      The whole thing is so depressing .

      • Timaction
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:01 pm | Permalink

        That is precisely why we need to stop fptp and bring in proportional representation. Then, regardless of titles or meaningless labels on parties who are all the same left of centre, we could have a proper vote. They would all have to offer us policies we actually wanted or supported or perish. No more collusion, lies and deceit that we’ve had to tolerate for decades since Thatcher! All selling us out to their beloved EU superpower.
        JRM knocked Davis out of the park this morning in his Committee. He was to made to look the complete fool he has been. Totally incapable of representing the British people as is (dis)May in EU negotiations!

      • getahead
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

        Gove knifed Boris. Media speak.

    • Mitchel
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:00 am | Permalink

      The trouble is May is representative of a frighteningly large constituency of jellybabies in this country-take a vignette from today’s news-a Mumsnet user wrote in asking if it would be unreasonable if she asked her child’s nursery not to sing the nursery rhyme “Wind the bobbin” because she thought it offensive to the memories of the northern cotton workers who worked in “horrendous places”.

    • John
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:29 pm | Permalink

      Nice post like it, said it better than I could.

  5. sm
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:22 am | Permalink

    Reminds me of all those MPs of all Parties who now complain that the Referendum vote did not clarify what was being proposed – yet none of them appear to have raised these issues when the proposal was being debated in the HoC.

    • Hope
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:14 am | Permalink

      I want to know why Miller and co are not shouting and taking legal action that May agreed something whether there is a deal or not before parliament debate and vote?

  6. Henry Spark
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:48 am | Permalink

    What a peculiar post. Mr Redwood’s Conservative government pushes through a Treaty which involves us paying money to France and accepting more migrants …. but he blames the Labour Party!!

    • NickC
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      Henry Spark, JR is not blaming Labour for the Sandhurst Treaty, he is blaming Labour for the hypocrisy of opposing so extensively the transfer of already extant EU legislation on to the UK statute book, whilst not bothering with this treaty.

  7. Iain Gill
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:11 am | Permalink

    I find it odd that backbench government mp’s have done little to demand parliamentary scrutiny.

  8. Duncan
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:13 am | Permalink

    Tim Martin telling it as it is in this morning’s interim results for JG Wetherspoon.

    Essentially, Mr Martin accuses the CBI and other pro-EU political, business and media bodies of lying to the public to deceive them and to incite fear in them –

    Verbatim –

    “Most economists, business organisations and universities made extremely pessimistic forecasts about the immediate aftermath of a leave vote in the referendum, which have proven to be highly inaccurate. The Treasury, the IMF and the OECD were also key participants in this chorus. Their erroneous views lend weight to Warren Buffett’s aphorism that most forecasts tell you a lot about the forecaster, but nothing about the future.

    “In Wetherspoon’s last update, I said that the CBI, the British Retail Consortium (BRC) and the chairmen of Whitbread and Sainsbury’s had issued ‘factually incorrect and highly misleading’ information about food price rises, post Brexit, which had been reported as if they were true in publications such as the Financial Times, The Sunday Times and The Guardian. None of these individuals or organisations has contested the truth of the criticisms. If this misleading information were true, it could have a damaging effect on Wetherspoon, similar businesses and the public – but it is not.

    “By refusing to acknowledge the fact that food prices will be reduced, post Brexit, if the UK leaves the EU without a deal and parliament votes to eliminate taxes which are currently imposed on non-EU food imports, the CBI and the BRC are trying to fool the public and MPs and bringing business into disrepute.

    “These factually incorrect scare stories seem to be designed to convince the public that a deal is necessary to avoid a ‘cliff edge’. In fact, the cliff edge is a myth. There is almost no action needed, for most companies, if the UK leaves the EU without a deal. Provided that parliament takes sensible steps, such as the elimination of food taxes, the public will benefit from lower food prices, from regained fishing rights and from savings of about £200m per week of EU contributions.

    “Many people, including journalists and MPs, trust information from established organisations such as the CBI and the BRC – and many have been persuaded that food prices will rise if we leave the EU and the Customs Union. It should be emphasised that it is untrue and that the Customs Union, like the Corn Laws abolished nearly 200 years ago, keeps food prices at artificially high levels.

    “I have written an article with more detail on this subject in appendix 1 below and attach a misleading and untruthful Boxing Day press release from the BRC which, again, states that, without a deal, consumers would ‘inevitably’ face higher prices ‘for products such as fruit, vegetables, fish and clothing’ (appendix 2).

    End

    I feel ashamed that this nation’s people have been lied to and cajoled for political purposes by the EU and British political leaders. Under this PM the lying continues

    We ask. When will the Tories dispense with Theresa May and install a leader who tells the truth and refuses to tow the EU line?

    • Mark B
      Posted January 26, 2018 at 5:47 am | Permalink

      This really rather echo’s what I have been saying all a long. The so called FTA is nothing but a ruse and it is big business that wants to keep us in the SM and CU for their own selfish ends.

      The referendum was not about trade relations with the EU, it was about governance !

  9. PeterB
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:15 am | Permalink

    JR colains about the opposition not kicking up a shindig in parliament about the May Macron goings on..yet he is aldo in parliament snd could make as much noise as anyone..but no..he’d rather wait, say nothing, and then whinge on here

  10. Dave Andrews
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:19 am | Permalink

    Opposition MPs are largely career politicians, whose only objective is to further their own ends, and have little interest in benefitting the UK. Their task to hold the government to account is only a pretext for their real objective – act as an anti-government protest group.
    If any matter doesn’t have media appeal, they aren’t interested.

    I heard yesterday an article on the radio about how we can attract more young people into politics.

    I don’t see a need to attract young people into politics, I prefer people with experience to go into politics, after they have proved themselves by: raising a family, worked in business, worked in social services. Too many wet behind their ears thinking they can come along and lead the country.

    • Jagman84
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:56 pm | Permalink

      The “worked in social services” group are the ones who got us into this mess with their wrong-headed ideologies. The plethora of lawyers in the HoC are another bunch of self-serving parasites feeding off the conveyer belt of EU law. Keep them all well away from the levers of power, thanks!

    • Andy
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

      We have pensioners in charge of both main parties at the moment. They’re doing a great job, don’t you think?

      • Anonymous
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 10:42 pm | Permalink

        You’ll be old and a pensioner soon, Andy.

        Time zooms on by, it really does.

        The No Country for Old Men you seem to want will be here and you will have to live in it… as an old man yourself.

        Oh – it won’t matter that you voted Remain.

        You’ll be hated simply because you’re old and in the way.

      • mancunius
        Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:10 pm | Permalink

        Theresa May will not reach state pension age until 1st October 2022.

        But then, you don’t seem too interested in facts.

      • APL
        Posted January 27, 2018 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

        Andy: pensioners [] are doing a great job, don’t you think?

        Pensioners tend to have a lot of experience under their belt. Unfortunately, the experience Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have is mostly how to stab people in the back and get another rung up the greasy pole.

        ( excuse mixed metaphor )

  11. Nig l
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:26 am | Permalink

    More money to France and more migrants. A portent of greater things to come? Forget blaming the Opposition for not holding the Executive to account. It is TM who has been undemocratic by usurping the Leave vote through the back door.

  12. Cheshire Girl
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:27 am | Permalink

    Like some others on here, I would like to hear how many ‘children /refugees the Prime Minister has agreed to take. After all, the taxpayer deserves to know, and if they are going to be ‘fast tracked’ some of them could be here very soon. I suspect that the Politicians are hoping that this will soon be forgotten, buried under all the other problems that are in the news at present.

  13. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:50 am | Permalink

    Your point is well made Mr Redwood. Any chance of a newspaper article or letter published in a mainstream paper making this point?

    It would be useful to re frame the debate outside our echo chamber.

  14. Andy
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:58 am | Permalink

    It’s nothing to do with the opposition.

    It is all to do with the ineptitude of the car crash Brexit Tory Government – perhaps the most pathetic executive we have ever had.

    It is your party monumentally screwing up our country. You need to take responsibility for it – and to stop blaming others.

    At the local elections in May voters will make it very clear who they hold responsible. Then, come 2022, many of the current crop of Tory time wasters in Parliament will be sent to enjoy their much overdue retirements.

    The fact is that since it was taken over by the cancerous hard-right the Conservative party has lost the plot. On every level it is repeatedly demonstrated itself unfit to lead.

    The Tories have basically become UKIP by another name – and anyone who every doubted that UKIP is made up predominantly of deeply unpleasant clowns can not have been paying any attention at all for the last few weeks.

    • Anonymous
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

      You are kidding !

    • NickC
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

      Andy, Cheer up – you don’t need to worry so much. You’re getting the Remain you always wanted: in the EU for at least 5 years after the vote; regulatory alignment for years more; lots of our money paid to the EU for many years; complete subjugation to the EU in perpetuity for security, diplomatic, and military policies. Just think, you too could be a serf in the USE soon. Which is what you always wanted. And Mrs May is on your side!!

      • stred
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 6:36 am | Permalink

        The Lisbon Treaty allows for conscription. Junkers country may need YOU. Sorting the Russians out in the Ukraine civil war. Lovely. And the whole thing run by an unelected ex?-commie High Representative.

    • Hun
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:02 pm | Permalink

      Top ironic satire, keep it coming.

  15. agricola
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:11 am | Permalink

    The Corbynistas do not complain about the Treaty of Sandhurst because they can see nothing in it with which to bash the government.

  16. Ian Wragg
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:24 am | Permalink

    When we are in the do nothing membership extension period with no idea to where we are transiting. Will said MPs demand all EU legislation be scrutinised and voted on during this period. No thought not. Debate is only for UK inspired legislation.
    Two faced or what.

  17. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:33 am | Permalink

    I think you still don’t understand the May psychae.

    She will basically try to always take the path of least resistance, whether that is right or wrong. She will never stand up for what she believes, because she has no core beliefs except to be seen to never take a path where there is major resistance. That is why it’s so important for you to be MORE visible than Blair, Major, Clarke etc.

    So we give the French what they want- none of the abovementioned complain although of course she is giving away something for nothing. So it will go on. We British will be working harder, for longer, with a lower quality of life because this woman will have given it all away…

    This is the opposiyte of what Vote Leave was about.

  18. Blue and Gold
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    The comment ‘easiest to police that border for people leaving France in France……is clearly a good one which we wish to uphold’ , translated means: we are a xenophobic nation and don’t wish to have to process would be migrants to this country, in the UK.

    • NickC
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:08 pm | Permalink

      B&G, And why do you think these migrants want to leave the EU? Surely in your view they would want to stay in a safe region – France – in the embryonic USE that you so admire.

    • Edward2
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

      Do you think they are in danger in France?

    • getahead
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:52 pm | Permalink

      Or, putting it another way, we are a small country and we’re full.

  19. Bert Young
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:53 am | Permalink

    The “Sandhurst” meeting and the agreements reached was nothing more than a bit of dressing up . Macron will use any opportunity to show to the world that he is the only leader in the EU who counts and to try to overcome the serious moves in France to turf him out . Theresa was foolish as usual to give him a platform and to give the impression that we go along with his ideas . Hungary and Poland have put Macron in his place and we should do the same !.

  20. ChrisS
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    I can’t see a problem with paying the French a bit more to improve the border – as long as that is what the money is actually spent on.

    I do have an issue with our apparent willingness to take more migrants from Calais. This is the complete opposite of what we should be doing and we must convince the French that the ONLY outcome will be more economic migrants making the dangerous journey to enter the EU.

    Last time we took a batch of so-called children from Calais we were made to look a laughing stock when it was apparent to just about everyone that many were nothing of the sort. Estimated ages ranged from 19-30 ! We must demand to see verifiable documentation to be certain of the age of children backed by DNA testing to ensure that they genuinely do have relatives here.

    Every single economic migrant that arrives in France should be refused entry or deported. It is completely unacceptable for the French authorities to allow those that want to come to England to hang around Calais committing crime – in particular trespass, criminal damage, threatening behaviour and outright violence.

    If we are to pay a lot of money to help them deal with the problem we should be entitled to influence the way it is being dealt with.

    • NickC
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:13 pm | Permalink

      ChrisS, The migrants in France are France’s problem. If France doesn’t like dealing with the migrants then the French shouldn’t let them in. It is beyond cheek that the French should palm off their border failures onto us.

  21. nhsgp
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:56 am | Permalink

    I want a strong Parliament.

    ===========

    I want a muzzled Parliament for exactly the same reason for leaving the EU.

    You dictating to us what to do.

    If we take film producers, where one was getting laid without consent, its quite rightly wrong. You cannot harm others, and you can only make them do things with their explicit consent.

    If we look at MPs, they throw that out of the window. Where is the option for someone in the UK to consent to what MPs do, and withdraw consent? There is none.

    Why should MPs dump 12.5 trillion pounds of debts on the young without their explicit consent? That’s the financial equivalent of the sex issue.

    It’s also the modern day equivalent of slavery, debt bondage.

    Heck we even have politicians voting for saying they have presume consent over body parts.

    It needs to change.

    1. People need to give explicit consent.
    2. If you refuse consent, you don’t get the services.
    3. If the state doesn’t publish the full set of debts, it can’t expect people to pay them.
    4. We need direct control over you, on the basis that your track record is so bad.

    If T May wants some ideas, start with those.

  22. Duyfken
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:01 am | Permalink

    Even if we do eventually achieve a clean Brexit, despite that seeming increasingly moot, I intend never to vote Conservative again, a Party which has shown itself not fit for purpose. The example JR now gives us is not so much an indictment of Labour but of the government itself.

    • ChrisS
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:20 pm | Permalink

      If you propose to vote at all, who are you going to support – Corbyn and his Marxist sidekick ?

      The LibDems are going to disappear into oblivion so they are not an alternative.

      • Duyfken
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 7:27 am | Permalink

        Obviously neither Labour nor Lib Dem. If there is another candidate standing (even a raving loony), then I might vote just as a protest, otherwise not all.

  23. Iain Gill
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    How many people have we agreed to take?

    What are we doing to ensure those claiming to be children are not adults?

    What are we doing to ensure none are ISIS fighters on the run?

    Which areas childrens homes and foster care system, and schools, are going to be squeezed by this extra burden?

    How much have we budgeted for looking after these new arrivals, including cost in subsequent years until they are contributing members of society?

    What are we going to do if any supposed children turn out to be adults on closer inspection?

    What are we going to do to monitor the terrorist threat from these newcomers?

    Why are we not leaving it as Frances problem?

    Dont our politicians realise that letting more in just encourages others to set off on the journey to Calais?

    How many recent immigrants which Germany allowed in, have EU papers allowing them into the UK? and how many have come so far?

    These and other questions need answering…

  24. Bob
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    On Monday there was a motion debated to leave the EU on WTO terms.

    E-petition 200165 relating to leaving the European Union:
    http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Event/Index/2237e95c-62c3-498e-8174-619d61ef069b

    The ratio of remainers to leavers was evident and there was no attempt to correct the many myths promoted including when Rupa Huq pointed out that the NHS has not received the £350 million pounds a week “as promised”, this went unchallenged.

    • Peter
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

      Indeed. I received an email telling me it was being debated.

      I got the impression that the speakers were all rather pleased with themselves.

      They did not concede that we were waiting. They prefer to present the current impasse as continuing to work towards Brexit. They choose to ignore the lack of concessions and barriers to agreement on the other side. They tell us that due care and consideration must be given before taking such a momentous step.

      Standard delaying tactics in other words. Prepare yourself for a fudge.

    • Dennis
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

      Also unchallenged by Andrew Neil, Jo Coburn, Eddie Mair, et al at the BBC but even Nigel Farage does not understand what the bus poster means!!

  25. rose
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    “I still find it odd that the newly active Opposition forces in Parliament have nothing to say on this and allow the executive to do as they wish without comment or vote.”

    I don’t find it at all odd. It is all of a piece. These people want us to remain under a bureaucratic dictatorship. They never scrutinised anything coming from the EU and it in turn had never been scrutinised there. They are more than happy for us to be under the the Franco German axis. They are full of admiration for the new little Napoleon and would probably rather be ruled by him than their own government, just as they were taken in by the spin round Frau Merkel that she was the true leader of the Western World.

    • Mitchel
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 4:00 pm | Permalink

      Comparing the career of the luckless Napoleon III with the original,Karl Marx famously wrote that history repeats itself first as tragedy then as farce.I wonder what he would say of our new Napoleon IV.Almost certainly not “Vive L’Empereur!”(especially given the size of his maquillage bill).

      • stred
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 6:57 am | Permalink

        Very interesting article here about Napoleon IV. He was the product of various French cliques, including Le Siecle. Jean Pierre Jouyet worked for both sides in French politics and is now ambassador to the UK. No doubt they have their opposite numbers in the deep state here. No wonder treaties are sown up without anyone getting a word in. Why bother voting?
        http://www.voltairenet.org/article197427.html

  26. alan jutson
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 9:57 am | Permalink

    Once again we have given in to another Countries demands, with just a promise in return.

    Anyone who has travelled through Calais in recent times will have seen for themselves the masses of high fences to deter illegals from accessing the Port, they will have also seen lots of French Police on Duty, some armed with Automatic rifles, but what happens to those who try to break into lorries and the like.
    Absolutely Diddly Squat, they are simply sent back outside the perimeter fence to try again, and again and again.

    The Jungle has been demolished, but is being rebuilt again, the illegals are now spreading to other Ports not so well defended, and are now entering the UK from Belgium and Spain.

    People on EU soil should be an EU problem, not a UK one.
    The EU choose to have open borders, they choose to allow millions to walk in, they choose to rescue people at sea and bring them into the EU.

    Why is the EU (of which we are still part at the moment) not paying to solve all of these problems, why should we cough up for a second, third or fourth time.

    Look at the last Fiasco about 24 year old so called Children, why do we look and act in such an incompetent manner, why are all of our Departments of State so absolutely useless and clueless, for goodness sake they cost us enough !!!!.

    • alan jutson
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 8:09 am | Permalink

      Is there a problem with this post John, have I offended anyone, surely not too long is it ?

  27. Epikouros
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 10:17 am | Permalink

    The UK opposition parties are exclusively politically left wing:- eccentric socialists; Greens and Lib-Dems, national socialists; SNP and Plaid Cymru, all the way through to the Marxist and Trots; the momentum section of the Labour party(now large and growing). The left have always displayed a degree of hypocrisy, inconsistency and bizarre behaviour and never more so that in modern times so I believe the answer to your questions are obvious.

    However if the opposition do not wish to know or care what deal has been with the French I for one certainly would like to know a great deal more. What is the payment actually for and how many and which immigrants have been agreed will be accepted in detail and not in a vague announcement. At the best of times it appears to us the public that the affairs of state are shrouded in secrecy and with Theresa may in charge it also now appears that it is directionless as well.

  28. Bob
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 10:24 am | Permalink

    According to the Independent, senior EU figures have stated that Britain has “agreed in principle” to a Norway-style Brexit transition period. This means that the UK will adopt all new EU rules without having influence on them.

    It will require payments to the EU budget, continue with free movement of and our legal system will remain under the jurisdiction of the ECJ. Also the UK will not be able to negotiate new international trade deals during this period.

    • APL
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:12 pm | Permalink

      Bob: ” This means that the UK will adopt all new EU rules without having influence on them.”

      That would be a good settlement. Norway sits in its own right on the UN bodies that deligate international law to the EU that then deligates it to our ‘Parliament’.

      Since we are still a permanent member of the UN security council, we can in no time get representation on UN NGO bodies ( ISO, FAO, etc) we can then, as Ken Clarke might say, get a seat at the top table, on such decisions and see those decisions delegated to the EU.

  29. Bob
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Theresa May is set to authorise a rapid response unit to stop the spread of fake news.

    They’ll have their work cut out for them with the BBC, C4 and Sky fake news.

    • Blue and Gold
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

      I appreciate that you are, no doubt a Daily Mail or Torygraph reader, but really!!

      And of course if the BBC or the excellent Channel 4 news team came across as pro Brexit you would not complain.

      A lot of hypocrisy on this site.

      • zorro
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 8:18 am | Permalink

        Blue and Gold – I can assure you that there was never any chance in hell of them coming across as pro Brexit 😂 !!

        zorro

    • zorro
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 2:05 pm | Permalink

      Haha – I can guarantee that they won’t be addressing the fake news coming out of remainers still! Doubtless, there will be continual virtue signalling on oh so trendy issues…..

      zorro

    • Prigger
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:35 pm | Permalink

      It is not hate speech she hates but free speech.

    • Dennis
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:46 pm | Permalink

      Quite right Bob

  30. Beecee
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    On another matter I read that the Union Flag will only fly in Scotland on one day per year rather than the 15 days previously.

    Is it not therefore time to reduce the Barnett Formula to 1/15th of the present levy on the English taxpayer?

    The money saved can go to NHS England!

  31. Denis Cooper
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 11:59 am | Permalink

    The Treaty Section of the Foreign Office has published guidance:

    https://www.gov.uk/guidance/uk-treaties

    but I can’t say for sure whether this treaty falls within the scope of the CRAG legislation to which David Davis has referred in connection with EU withdrawal agreements.

    Under Section 2o of that Act:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/144230/Constitutional_Reform_and_Governance_Act_2010.pdf

    treaties which are subject to ratification must be laid before Parliament before that final step, but under Section 25:

    “(3) … a reference to ratification of a treaty is a reference to an act of a kind specified in subsection (4) which establishes as a matter of international law the United Kingdom’s consent to be bound by the treaty.

    (4) The acts are –

    (a) deposit or delivery of an instrument of ratification, accession, approval or acceptance;

    (b) deposit or delivery of a notification of completion of domestic procedures.”

    Perhaps this Sandhurst Treaty has been written to come into force on signature alone and does not require any further final ratification step? From the guidance:

    “Where a treaty has entered into force on signature alone, it is laid for the first and only time in the Treaty Series.”

    One might have thought MPs would want to know what is going on with this so they can decide whether they approve of it.

    • APL
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:07 pm | Permalink

      Denis Cooper: “One might have thought MPs would want to know what is going on with this so they can decide whether they approve of it.”

      Don’t be silly Denis, our poor MPs are only paid £75,000 per year, three times the average salary in the UK (2016) so it’s probably not enough to, you know, do their job!

  32. Adamb😠
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:15 pm | Permalink

    DD is reported today saying he expects a transition deal within the next eight weeks and that is the most important thing as far as he is concerned..i thought se voted to leave..might as well stay in the EU if this is the case

  33. Iain Gill
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    The labour party is even more open doors immigration than the Cameron/May fake conservatives, so we don’t really have an opposition pushing for what the people want.

  34. agricola
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 12:41 pm | Permalink

    Off piste but highly relevant. It would appear that our team of redirected remainers in the EU negotiation are moving towards the acceptance of a two year transition period starting end March 2019. It would appear that they accept that this would mean that we are subject to the ECJ, Customs Union, Single market, and continued free movement until March end 2021. We would also be paying our usual membership fee, but with absolutely no say in anything the EU is planning to do. Even worse we would not be able to finalise any new trade deals until well into 2021, which I would deem totally unacceptable.

    A phrase not used of late is that of an implementation period. I interpret implementation as putting into effect, or getting used to the new conditions of our relationship with the EU, and them with us, based on our withdrawal from the ECJ, Customs Union, Single Market, and Free Movement Market at end March 2019. Based on the premise that there should be “No taxation without representation” I can see no reason to continue any membership fee payment while we implement.

    I fear that our negotiating team are falling over themselves to get a deal at any price. I think it long overdue that we heard your thoughts on the way things appear to be going, and the thoughts of your readership on the subject. Additionally why do we have to wait until March to get this circus on the road again.

  35. graham1946
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    This is Parliament’s (MP’s) fault, not just the Opposition. Ministers, particularly PM’s have too much individual power. They should not be able to get us into ‘Treaties’ without the permission of Parliament.

    It is obvious why Labour don’t want to rock this boat, they love to virtue signal and want us to stay in. Same for most of the Tories as well. The last thing any of them will do is question immigration. Did you put in a question to the Prime Minister about this matter?

  36. Miss Brandreth-Jones
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

    I am not convinced, We have our allies from the more recent past and should a re inaction of past events occur sometime in the future we will keep those allies.

  37. Mick
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/909173/Brexit-news-latest-update-today-UK-EU-Brussels-European-Union-Theresa-May-deal-video
    This is why we need someone to organise a mass rally for Brexit in the middle of England to show Brussels and the remoaners that we want to leave the dreaded E.U.

    • Margaret Robinson
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 9:24 am | Permalink

      It’s coming. All brexit FB pages have been united under a page and website called The List Brexit. A full page advert will be appearing in the Daily Express and a petition with as big a rally as we can muster will accompany it. Please join The List

  38. APL
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:03 pm | Permalink

    JR: “It provides for the UK to send more money to the French government to reinforce the border …”

    WHY?

    JR: ” and for the UK to take more migrants from France. ”

    WHY?

    Will the French pay us to accommodate these people while they stay here?

    Otherwise the British tax payer is bearing the burden of education, social welfare and medical treatment ( TB is already rampant in London ) of these people, that the French government has allowed to wander into and right across their own country?

    • APL
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 10:32 am | Permalink

      Mr Redwood, Why has the administration you support agreed to take more migrants from France?

      France may have abandoned control of its borders, but that doesn’t mean the UK should too.

      Is France considered an unsafe country? It’s a Western democracy with a long history of (a) abandoning control of its borders. (b) an excellent human rights record.

      In which case, migrants to France can stay in France, Non?

      In Sweden, Police have ( in 2005 ) reported they have recovered anti Tank missiles in suburbs of Örebro?

      Do you think similar smuggling is going on in the UK?

      • APL
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 5:41 pm | Permalink

        “In Sweden, Police have ( in 2005 ) reported ”

        2015 not 2005.

        Obvously, Mr Redwood isn’t concerned that our Welfare rolls are going to be inflated because France can’t be bothered to enforce its borders.

        Neither is he concerned that People smuggling is being conducted under the noses of the authorities which are supposed to stamp it out.

        And not bothered at all, about the possibility that migrants who are being hoovered up in Calais and dropped into the middle of London are not necessarily well disposed to this country.

  39. Yawn
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

    We should not need to say to an old nation like France “Pretty please stop people wandering from your domain into ours. ” But we always needed to. France is a very unstable and irresponsible country like Germany has always been. Ongoing threats to us.

  40. Anonymous
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    What shared border? Is this a joke ?

  41. formula57
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

    It is but only a little surprising surely that the loyal Opposition, opportunistic, hypocritical and self-serving as it is, has not chosen to use the Sandhurst Treaty for the easy task of exposing the Government as weak and vacillating for there are better subjects to pick to whip up voter ire, like the now traditional winter NHS crisis with inadequately treated patients dying on trolleys in corridors.

    As Mark B alludes (first above), the Combined Joint Expeditionary Force is a most unwelcome and probably dangerous development. Shame upon the Government for entangling the UK in Evil Empire-inspired adventurism. Shame upon us though for believing Brexit meant Brexit.

    • Mark B
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      Cheers
      😊

  42. The Prangwizard
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:43 pm | Permalink

    Having a dig at the opposition is one thing, but this is another diversion tactic. It is Mrs May who is the one doing the damage. Theresa the Appeaser. She will sell us all out. She has no intention of protecting out sovereignty.

    The Brexit Minister tried to dodge questions about the ‘transition period’ on the Daily Politics’today. Andrew Neil showed him up trying to deceive us. It is a continuity period. We will still be under the heel of the EU. Mrs May loves it. She must be removed. What are you doing to achieve that Mr R. Or are you as many suspect happy to roll over.

  43. Rien Huizer
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

    Mr Redwood’s problem is apparently that the “brexit bill” was debated extensively and this one hardly or not at all. But this is something all sides agree about. So why put up a show of contention?

    • Iain Gill
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

      Well where is side representing the vast majority of the public that want immigration drastically reduced? There isn’t one, because the political candidate selection process does not work.

    • getahead
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:08 pm | Permalink

      Nevertheless it does highlight the enormous bias that parliament has in favour of the EU.
      Which also highlights the problem the electorate have in getting the winning Leave vote through parliament. MPs not supporting their constituencies.

    • John
      Posted January 24, 2018 at 8:36 pm | Permalink

      Nobody knew about it or the details until after it was passed.

      In the UK we think that is a problem. Evidently where you are from its not. There lies the difference.

  44. stred
    Posted January 24, 2018 at 6:00 pm | Permalink

    Off subject. Boris was being bashed on the anti-brexit media this morning. The OBR has said there is no money for his suggested bail out of the NHS, so they could make out that he is talking rubbish. However, there was also news that the deficit has reduced by £5bn and half that last month. Perhaps he was keen to use this better news to stop the latest gift to the opposition. By the way, not having ordered flu vaccine which works for the latest flu which whacked the Aussies last year is not going to be a popular move. The saving was about £2/jab over the triple vaccine so the cost of beds and ambulances may offset this.

    • Mark B
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 7:36 am | Permalink

      Well they can find £50bn for the EU and £45m for France.

      • Rien Huizer
        Posted January 25, 2018 at 11:27 am | Permalink

        These amounts, spread out over maybe many years, are a mere rounding error. The same applies to the EU budgetary consequences of brexit. For the net payers, it is a nice opportunity to reduce EU dues and for the net receivers, a challenge. Good behaviour may get you some money, Visegrads, bad behaviour means that you would have to work harder.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 10:26 am | Permalink

      I happened to see a copy of George Osborne’s London Evening Lowstandard and I read that the government budget deficit has gone down unexpectedly thanks to the EU giving us a lot of money, in fact the word “windfall” was used.

      http://www.pressreader.com/uk/london-evening-standard-west-end-final-a/20180123/282226601147174

      “UK deficit posts surprise fall – thanks to Europe”

      “The European Union chipped in to cutting the UK’s deficit last month after a surprise £1.2 billion windfall, official figures revealed today.

      Revisions to the EU budget produced the one-off bonus – the biggest such payment since August 2001 – and sliced the December deficit in half to just £2.6 billion.”

      The editor of this newspaper was previously Chancellor of the Exchequer and he knows perfectly well that this refund is just part of our own taxpayers’ money being returned to us, but like most of his kind he is so utterly dishonest and so lacking in any sense of shame that he will allow this unspeakable rubbish about how the EU “chipped in” with a “windfall”, a “one-off bonus”, to appear in its pages.

  45. rose
    Posted January 25, 2018 at 1:57 am | Permalink

    For that matter, why does there have to be a debate about Hezbollah being proscribed when the Home Secretary proscribes obscure little national socialist groups no-one has heard of, all by herself?

  46. Bryan Harris
    Posted January 25, 2018 at 8:26 am | Permalink

    It’s really time that the public were properly informed of the treaties that just get signed, willy nilly, just because it pleases the current governments to do so…

    NO MORE TREATIES, Unless we all get to vote on them – there are far too many in existance that cut into our democracy!!

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted January 25, 2018 at 10:33 am | Permalink

      Well, it would be a start if our elected representatives took more of an interest and maybe even voted on some of the more important.

  • About John Redwood


    John Redwood won a free place at Kent College, Canterbury, and graduated from Magdalen College Oxford. He is a Distinguished fellow of All Souls, Oxford. A businessman by background, he has set up an investment management business, was both executive and non executive chairman of a quoted industrial PLC, and chaired a manufacturing company with factories in Birmingham, Chicago, India and China. He is the MP for Wokingham, first elected in 1987.

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

    You can sign up to receive John's blog posts by e-mail by entering your e-mail address in the box below.

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

    The e-mail service is powered by Google's FeedBurner service. Your information is not shared.

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page