A managed exit without signing the Withdrawal Agreement

I will be writing soon about how this is our best way forward. It is not “crashing out” but cashing in, as we will keep the money the EU wanted to extract via the Withdrawal Agreement.

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

156 Comments

  1. hans christian ivers
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:41 am | Permalink

    John,

    I think you have misunderstood the cashing in, we have already lost more in the process by falling growth due to Brexit. (source Nomura)

    Reply Not true. I have set out the factors influencing UK growth and they are not because of Brexit

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

      But it must be true, JR, because that falling growth can be seen on this chart:

      https://tradingeconomics.com/united-kingdom/gdp-growth-annual

      and the economically deleterious effect of Brexit has been so powerful that it has warped the time space continuum, and it started to inhibit growth even before we had voted to leave the EU, in fact even before the Act was passed to enable an EU referendum to be held, in fact even before we had a majority Tory government capable of getting such a referendum Act passed … I don’t know whether Nomura had successfully predicted the 6% drop in GDP in 2008, or whether they were among those predicting an immediate recession if we so much as dared to vote to leave the EU, but surely we must trust that they can accurately detect this minor retroactive braking effect of Brexit which started in late 2014 …

      • acorn
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:58 pm | Permalink

        Denis, I would say the UK declining growth is 85% Osborne / Hammond classic neoliberal austerity, and 15% Brexit. I have another post that explains it.

        • Dennis
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:14 pm | Permalink

          To put a proud face on declining growth we should be shouting from the rooftops that we are dealing helpfully with climate change and by reducing the destruction of the biosphere. Other countries should follow our achievement.

        • Edward2
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:40 pm | Permalink

          How you can describe Osborne and Hammond as “classic neo liberal” is beyond me.
          Two of the most controlling, regulating ang taxing chancellors we have ever had.

          • Lifelogic
            Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:22 pm | Permalink

            Indeed highest taxes for forty years, poor and declining public services, endless waste, absurd tax complexity and endless idiotic red tape too.

        • a-tracy
          Posted December 12, 2018 at 9:44 am | Permalink

          George Osborne is an EU fan and supporter how can you claim he is neo liberal? The EU Parliament do limit competition and divi up between EU nations paying some businesses to relocate. The austerity GO and Philip Hammond was doing seem to be in compliance with the EU rules on debt and deficit acorn – are you saying they can completely ignore the EU rules on that since 2008 because if so these are the questions our news anchors should be asking Mr Hammond, why to pursue a policy if we don’t need to, Macron seems to be able to ignore it with impunity.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted December 12, 2018 at 3:10 pm | Permalink

          Noted.

          But are you sure that it is 15%, not 5% or 25%?

      • Tom
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

        The forex markets are being manipulated by the banks so take no notice of the pound falling. It’s only to feed BBC propaganda.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:40 pm | Permalink

      Main reasons that are suppressing UK growth:-

      The Highest and most complex taxes for forty years, lack of vision from May and Hammond potentially giving us Corbyn, project fear, OTT bank lending restrictions, endless waste in our bloated and largely inept government, disingenuous halfwits in nos 10 and 11, HS2 Hinckley C waste, Mark Carney abusing his office, the green crap expensive energy agenda, pc drivel like gender pay reporting, an NHS that is a sick joke, poor schools, circa 50% of university degrees being a complete waste of money, lack of a sensible real Brexit vision …..

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        Got it in one L/L. Common sense really.

        • Timaction
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

          Reports on Breitbart that May was briefing foreign leaders and the EU on her latest betrayal to have the meaningful vote today, once again before the Cabinet. She simply has to go! We know she,s batting for them. Nothing in the Withdrawal Agreement in our favour except vassal status and no say all for£39 billion plus assets

    • NickC
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:03 pm | Permalink

      Hans, You should be ashamed to put your name to such nonsense. Comparing real life to a hindcast guess and finding real life to be a failure is sheer tosh. Only a devoted Remain could accept it. You Remains haven’t got a significant forecast right yet.

    • Hope
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

      JR, what happened to the: nothing agreed until everything agreed? I thought the trade deal was mean to be signed so that the first two phases would bring meat on the bones. The same as the bigger prize was worth the compromises under the first two phases.

      Seriously, JR, why is May not being held to account on this?

    • oldtimer
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:33 pm | Permalink

      It is essential to promote the idea of a “managed exit” to counter the prevailing narrative of “crashing out”, the “cliff edge” and “chaos” that is endlessly promoted in parliament, on the BBC and elsewhere.

      But to turn that idea into effective action we/you need a PM who actually believes in it. May is not that PM. Indeed does May actually believe in anything apart from clinging to office?

      • John Hatfield
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

        May has been forbidden to leave office by her Establishment controllers. I can’t think of any other reason why anyone would put up with so much humiliation for so long.

    • Edward2
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

      In actual fact the UK has lost nothing.
      All we have is a report claiming we might have had more growth had we done different things.
      It is an abstract concept.
      Germany has falling growth.
      What have they done wrong?

    • libertarian
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:22 pm | Permalink

      hans

      How odd, because you remainers keep telling us that having more people here working creates growth in the economy and we’ve created million new jobs since the referendum…. Anyone would think you dont know what you’re talking about.

      Meanwhile back in Denmark ISS announce redundancy for 100,000 workers !!!

    • hans christian ivers
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

      JR,

      Thank you for your kind response , I agree you have set out that argument from the beginning but there are very few who actually believe that argument, but you .

      • Edward2
        Posted December 12, 2018 at 9:20 pm | Permalink

        That isn’t a real reply hans.
        We are told open borders will make is all much richer.
        Figures show this isn’t true.

  2. Know-Dice
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:55 am | Permalink

    Mr Redwood, I know you asked the question in the House of Commons yesterday “what EXACTLY is the £39 Billion paying for” and got no real answer.

    Does ANYONE know the details of what it pays for?

    It certainly isn’t for future trade arrangements….

    • KZB
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:24 pm | Permalink

      It’s our share of the EU budget that we signed up to, plus some extras like our share of the pensions liability.
      We are told we owe it whether or not there is a trade deal.
      Having signed the withdrawal agreement we would be legally obliged to pay it. The EU does not have to offer us anything in return for this money, the trading arrangements are a separate issue.
      We agreed to this idiocy when the “negotiations” first started.

      • Stred
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:33 pm | Permalink

        Now that we are leaving, they don’t need the budget that we agreed. They should trim it, not expand. Things change and they should change accordingly. Sre them in court, as Trump advised Mrs Pushover.

        • Adam
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:39 pm | Permalink

          That is a valid & important point, Stred. It is one of those losses that become overlooked, & beyond the detailed grasp of those who are supposed to be authorising precisely what costs we are subsequently billed for. It may however be a substantive amount to lose.

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:43 pm | Permalink

        So we didn’t pay for the pensions of earlier EU employees when we joined? Those were all ring fenced to be paid by pre-existing members?

        Why do I think the answers are No and No?

      • Butties
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:46 pm | Permalink

        KZB, Nothing is agreed unless everything is agreed. Comprendi?
        With May gone, we start again, bit like the ECJ saying we can cancel Art 50 as we see fit with no penalties.
        What is written in stone ( bar a Parliamenrary Act) is that we leave on the 29/3/19 11:00 geddit?

      • Michael Yeadon
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:08 pm | Permalink

        Furthermore we owe even if we remain.

    • acorn
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:26 pm | Permalink

      The £39 billion is a UK Treasury guesstimate of the project commitments, the UK signed up to over the period of its membership of Club EU. The EU has never put a figure on the divorce settlement, only how it will be calculated.

      As far as I have gathered, there is no clause in the Treaty that requires a final bill to be presented for payment, to a member state, that is leaving Club EU under Art 50. Neither is there a clause that can refer it to an international court for arbitration.

      However, again as far as I can gather, it was made plain to the UK last December, no pay the divorce bill, no get any future relationship with the EU whatsoever.

      • Caterpillar
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:57 pm | Permalink

        Acorn,

        Quacks like a bung.

      • John Hatfield
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:51 pm | Permalink

        “no pay the divorce bill, no get any future relationship with the EU whatsoever.”
        Holy smoke, acorn! Then let’s not pay it!

      • Know-Dice
        Posted December 12, 2018 at 2:09 pm | Permalink

        Thanks Acorn,

        Now after delving in to the Withdrawal Agreement [what a load of legal gobbledygook] it’s clear that May wants the UK to sign up to potentially never ending financial commitments that the EU makeup and will bill us for.

        Certainly this should and could have been kept back to only be paid on maybe “good will” grounds after a trade agreement was in the bag…

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:47 pm | Permalink

      There are also unspecified payments for access to databases which we built with our data. Rather like giving your house to the national trust then being charged to visit it.

  3. Maybot
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:00 am | Permalink

    When will Mark Carney give us his assessment of Remain + Corbyn ? Because that is what we’ll be getting.

    BBC at it this morning. Trying to show us how voters have changed to Remain.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:46 pm | Permalink

      The BBC bias is totally blatant, endless and absurd. On Brexit, on climate alarmism, on magic money tree economics, taxation levels, bloated government knows best, endless PC left wing drivel …… The bias might not be too bad but for the fact that they are totally wrong on every single one of the above issues.

      Rather like T May, P Hammond and the Libdims.

      • margaret howard
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 5:57 pm | Permalink

        “Bill Brewer, Jan Stewer, Peter Gurney, Peter Davy, Dan’l Whiddon, Harry Hawke,
        and
        Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all.”

        • Edward2
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

          You even fail at humour.

  4. eeyore
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    During the aborted debate our host asked about the legal necessity of the £39bn, and received a brush-off from the PM. She claimed to have legal advice that the payment must be made but gave no details.

    As it works out at £600 each we all have a substantial interest. Has this advice been published, or must we once again rely on Mrs May’s word?

    • jerry
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:51 pm | Permalink

      @eeyore; Indeed. Surely the legal advice about the £39bn payment is part of the advice that should have been published, or did the instruction issued from the floor of the house only deal with advice from the AG?

      All relevant information is part of the Brexit conundrum for which MPs must find an answer, nothing (from either side) should be withheld, sort of that which affects the intelligence & military services.

    • NickC
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

      Eeyore, Remains think it isn’t very much money, so they have kindly offered to pay for it all – since it is their EU. If the HoC gets its way we will stay within the clutches of the EU and still pay. That means Remains can easily fork out the trivial £39bn from the multiple benefits and riches bestowed by the EU. So it’s best of both worlds for the likes of Hans, Acorn, Andy, etc.

      • acorn
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:16 pm | Permalink

        Spot on NickC; the return on our net investment in the EU at circa £8 billion a year, is yielding circa £100 to £140 billion a year, that turns up in our GDP. I call that a very nice little earner. You can take your fantasy sovereignty, I will take the cash.

        • NickC
          Posted December 12, 2018 at 10:45 am | Permalink

          Acorn, Quite clearly you don’t know the difference between turnover and profit, even if your figures were correct, which they aren’t. Trade with European states is not dependent upon being in the EU, as most of the rest of the world knows.

          Sovereignty is not a fantasy, as most of the rest of the world and most of the history of the world, including Europe, has demonstrated. Sovereign nations tend to be richer than if they were provinces of an empire, because the centre of the empire rakes in the wealth.

          • acorn
            Posted December 12, 2018 at 1:37 pm | Permalink

            What has turnover and profit got to do with GDP? Me thinks you don’t know your microeconomics from your macroeconomics.

        • libertarian
          Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:02 pm | Permalink

          acorn

          psst want to buy the Eiffel Tower with some of that money you’re earning , especially as you bet your house that May’s Withdrawl Bill would win the vote… you must be raking it in… oh

      • John Hatfield
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

        Or perhaps NickC, the 8% of businesses that actually benefit from EU membership could pay it.

  5. DUNCAN
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:02 am | Permalink

    I believe you are in danger of putting the proverbial horse before the cart. The removal of May and the election of a conviction Eurosceptic should be yours and indeed our top priority. All else will flow from this.

    • NickC
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

      Duncan, Removing deluded and proven liar Theresa May is a necessary pre-condition for Leave. But what about the 250+ Tory and 200+ Labour MPs who still think the Referendum result merely authorised them to re-negotiate David Cameron’s re-negotiation? They are just as deluded, and impractical to remove.

    • Man of Kent
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:50 pm | Permalink

      Absolutely.
      Get rid of May and Hammond as top priority then let’s have a real ‘leaver’ in charge .

    • Adam
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:52 pm | Permalink

      Duncan:

      Putting the horse before the cart is the normal less dangerous way, as horses tend to pull. However, putting a stalking horse behind the cart to push Mrs May out would add a joint force of goodness, moving her out of the way.

  6. Peter Divey
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:13 am | Permalink

    Dear John
    I agree with you, but we are clearly in a minority now. Parliament will not permit a No Deal, and will rescind article 50 using the new freedom that the ECJ have now provided. We won the battle, but have now lost the war.

    • outsider
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      Dear Peter Davey, Sadly you are right that opposing what they call “no deal” is about the only thing all Parties in Parliament can agree on. Another case of consensus usually being wrong.
      But is the Government not trying to back the Labour Opposition into a corner, as several Labour MPs twigged yesterday, by forcing them – as close as possible to March 29 – to choose between her Deal and killing Brexit altogether? Labour could then be presented as deceiving and betraying their voters unless they either supported the Government deal or refused to fall into the trap and abstained.

  7. Mark B
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:18 am | Permalink

    As someone here mentioned, you do not crash out of something but into it.

    Leaving the EU, no matter by what method was never going to be easy or without some economic pain. But we must look to nations that have either split or been created from new to see what things may be in store. I do not believe much of the nonsense being spouted and I think on that I am in a majority. Neither do I see sunny uplands and endless blues sky’s. But what I do see is a sovereign nation taking its rightful and proper place at the top, top international tables of the world. A nation that does not have a foreign policy dictated by the European External Action Service. That and that alone is worth all the pain and hardship as it will strengthen our voice around the world as the UK is a permanent member of the UN Security Council and founder member of the UN.

    Our PM, Ministers and MP’s will regain our right to govern as we wish them to. No more having to be told what we can and cannot do in our own lands. Ministers will be able to formulate policy and not have to go to the relevant EU Commissioner before parliament. The Chancellor will no have to show the EU our budget before parliament gets to see it.

    Think about it. Currently we are a homeowner who has to seek the permission of some High Authority to have new curtains and wall paper. And if and when I get said permission I then have to negotiate with 27 other of my neighbours as to what colour and materials these have to be, all the while why I am paying for it ! If that was to happen to each and every one of us in our lives how many here would stand for it ? Not many I would aver.

  8. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:23 am | Permalink

    If you don’t want dogs in your pub, what’s the best way to keep them out?

    My suggestion: make a rule that dogs are not allowed to come into the pub, possibly with an exception for guide dogs, and ban customers who persist in breaking that rule.

    The EU’s suggestion: introduce a ban on dogs throughout the whole of the borough, and punish those found harbouring dogs in contravention of that by-law.

    Theresa May’s suggestion: the same as the EU’s suggestion, but to avoid treating that borough differently extend the legal ban on dogs to the whole of the county.

    Because it is only through a law to keep the whole county free from dogs that the manager can be confident that no dog will ever find its way into his pub … and the same thing with chlorinated chickens, of course.

  9. Richard1
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:28 am | Permalink

    that is only true if you are right and Mrs May is wrong that the £39bn is not legally owed. a good place to start would be to clarify that by publishing legal advice, otherwise its just assertion and counter-assertion which is inane. Mrs May confirmed her view that’s all due irrespective was confirmed by her yesterday from the dispatch box – which presumably gives another legal argument to the EU that it is owed? need to clarify asap

    Reply The House of Lords did publish why we do not owe anything in considerable detail. I have read the Treaty and there is no reference to us having to pay on exit

    • Stred
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

      The AG said that the money was not owed under EU law but would be if challenged under English law. Why then don’t we employ a good English lawyer and let them sue us for it. They have increased spending at the club bar for years after we leave. Why does the law make us liable?

      We are also expected not to prosecute EU criminals and not to tax the ex EU employees, even though anyone else has to pay tax on foreign pensions. Is this due under UK law?

      • William
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 5:49 pm | Permalink

        It doesn’t have to be an English lawyer, just whoever is the best. Unfortunately while we are in the EU that might be somewhat restricted from the outside World due to their protectionist immigration laws.

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

        Yes if we pay their pensions they should be taxed. EU law will no longer apply. A cliff edge indeed for EU ex employee pensioners!

    • James
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:37 pm | Permalink

      Mrs May and Geoffrey Cox said that “sources” other than the House of Lords have said that the circa £39 billion is due to be paid by the UK to the EU. Surely we are entitled to know:-
      1. Who exactly are these “sources”
      2. Why is the money due to be paid
      3. How has the sum been calculated
      I would not give much for the re-election chances of any MP who sanctions the payment of anything like such a sum

      • Richard1
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

        It seems to me that either the money is owed – ie a court would be likely to find that it is – or it is not. there is no point having a ‘tough’ PM who refuses to pay the money if we will have to cough it up (+ costs) in any event. equally if it really isn’t owed I suggest the brexiteers get very much more specific as to why not, with references etc.

        • Dennis
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:35 pm | Permalink

          On the Marr Show this Sunday both he and Boris agreed that ‘money’ is to be paid. That’s all anyone says about it – no details whatsoever.

          JR muddies the water as usual he writes ‘…there is no reference to us having to pay on exit’. On exit? What about before and/or after?

      • matthu
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:38 pm | Permalink

        I guess it depends on who might arbitrate over this dispute and how political that institution was?

  10. Mick
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    If Mrs May doesn’t get the deal she wants then she should call for a GE, and being labours mps including the labour front bench are insistent on us staying in the custom union and the single market there by not leaving the Eu I would put money on it that the labour mps would be reduced by more than half by there core leaver voter, it would be brilliant to see the smug look wiped off the labour faces as they are reduced to a handful of mps

  11. Peter
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    Running down the clock and fear of ‘No Deal/No Brexit’ will be May’s tactics.

    She needs to be removed – but she survives.

    WTO needs a massive campaign just to get back into serious consideration. MPs don’t want it but the public do.

    • outsider
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:56 pm | Permalink

      Turning Project Fear on its head might help. The Bank of England envisages house prices falling by more than a third after a “no deal” Brexit. What a fantastic result for Britain’s young people and “generation rent”.

    • eeyore
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

      The only practical way to delay our departure on March 29 is for a Minister to present a Statutory Instrument to that effect and win approval for it from both Houses.

      I am no expert, but apparently an SI must be considered in committee and is open for debate. The procedure seems slow and deliberate. It is not a trap that government can spring at the last minute.

      If Mrs May’s strategy is to take things to the wire in the hope of forcing a strongly Remain House to choose between No Deal and her WA, it seems she will have to forego the option of deferring the leaving date. Conversely, deferring the date will relieve all pressure on MPs to back the WA.

    • old salt
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:16 pm | Permalink

      Peter – Or preferably a FTA free of the political subjugation.

  12. Kenneth
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:48 am | Permalink

    But the BBC will not accept a non-agreement Brexit and has underscored its political opposition by exploring every eventuality that effectively keeps us tied to the eu, despite this dangerous idea being a radical departure from democratic politics.

    The current BBC campaign is a blatant and rebellious effort to deny democracy to the People of Great Britain and the People should never have to put up with that.

    The BBC has powerful transmitters and a massive budget. I am sure their propaganda will have some effect on correspondence received by MPs from their constituents and this could change a few votes.

    In light of this I hope MPs will consider putting forward a motion forcing broadcasters to accept the same controls on the balance of their output as they normally are subjected to during elections and referendums. Only when MPs have decided we have settled this matter, should those controls be lifted.

    This will be the only way to get true Brexit voices back on the airwaves imho

  13. Alan Jutson
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    About time the Leave group of Mp’s got together and put forward a sensible option to outline all the positive reasons for a clean break.
    Then get behind that plan and promote it together.

    You have ploughed on John, and thank you for your efforts, but too many seem to lack real conviction to promote a positive policy with some detail.

    Even Boris has been wishy washy, first WTO, then Canada Plus Plus, Now he suggests on Marr that the deal may be ok without a backstop, etc, etc.

    I get the feeling that WTO will never make it through Parliament from all the so called comments we hear, but has anyone explained it, promoted, debated it properly in Parliament, because its seems so logical and simple to many of us out here.

    Above all we then take control of our own destiny.

  14. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:53 am | Permalink

    This will be a tricky route with this idiot capitulator in charge tmin comparison with it as stated policy.

  15. MickN
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    Sir, can you tell us if you think Mrs May REALLY believes that a few tweaks to the backstop thing will get her vote passed by the House of Commons. She can’t be that daft can she?

    • Tom
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:18 pm | Permalink

      Have all legal loopholes been closed so it is now not possible to avoid paying the BBC? I have not watched any BBC programme for 3 years now. Only highlights on Youtube. I would emigrate for my consciounce sake if I am forced as resident of the UK to pay the BBC.

  16. Turboterrier.
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:01 am | Permalink

    Great John.

    We will read it and give our comments. On the recent performance of May, her ministers and all the other remainers in the house they will not bother to read it.

    All members of the Can Not ,Could Not, Will Not, Did Not, tribe of negativity,

  17. rose
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:02 am | Permalink

    This is what I wanted to do right at the beginning, without having Mrs May as PM.

    David Cameron should have stayed, said “I get it”, and appointed a cross party war cabinet of sincere and gifted Brexiteers, while keeping a reshuffled Conservative Cabinet for everything else, and then really gone for it. I think he could have done it if Mr Osborne had been given another job outside government. That was the big “if”. Mr Redwood should have been appointed Chancellor.

    It would have been quite a different experience as Mr Cameron is not a control freak.

    • John Hatfield
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:13 pm | Permalink

      rose, it is my belief that Cameron was removed by the Tory hierarchy and the compliant May installed in his place. All part of the plan which has resulted in the mess the country is now in.

    • Tom
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

      Cameron was a puppet May is a puppet.

  18. Bob
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:07 am | Permalink

    I would like to nominate my spouse to handle the negotiations with Brussels. She has a natural ability at negotiating and I suspect the EU would be happy to pay £39 billion and much of Northern France would be thrown in to boot plus Nectar points on the trade deficit.
    Message me.

  19. Lifelogic
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Indeed that is clearly the best way to go by far for the Country and the Tory Party too.

  20. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Last night MPs spent nearly an hour questioning Steve Barclay about the ECJ judgment, but nobody pointed out that the leading reason the judges gave to allow us to revoke the Article 50 notice is also the leading reason why we should not revoke it:

    “As regards the context of Article 50 TEU … those treaties have as their purpose the creation of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe … ”

    “… it would be inconsistent with the Treaties’ purpose of creating an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe to force the withdrawal of a Member State … ”

    Back under the coalition government there was talk of a “mandate referendum”, and my suggestion then was that it should be about “ever closer union”, for example:

    http://johnredwoodsdiary.com/2013/03/15/the-mandate-referendum/#comment-174479

    “However rather than the rather woolly question:

    “Do you want the UK government to negotiate a new relationship with the EU, based on free trade and political co-operation?”

    I would prefer to get to the heart of the matter by asking the British people whether they wish to continue further with the process of “ever closer union” mandated by the present EU treaties.”

    I note in passing on that thread in March 2013:

    “The purpose of a mandate referendum should not be to authorise the government to start negotiations but for the people to constrain their government during those negotiations through a clear negotiating mandate which it must observe.

    Because the government cannot be trusted, and it should not be left free to agree to whatever it fancied as has always been the case in the past.”

  21. Newmania
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:27 am | Permalink

    Keep it by holding a second referendum and not losing it in the first place ?
    Good god no …. we have MADE OUR DECISION ….
    ” Nanny ..I am afraid my choice of a tee shirt and shorts was unwise and now I see it is snowing can I please change my mind ”
    ” I am sorry young Johnny , you have MADE YOUR DECISION and now you must die of hypothermia “

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:29 pm | Permalink

      Monday. I voted in a referendum and now I’m not so sure. Can we have another vote?
      Tuesday. I voted in a referendum and now I’m not so sure. Can we have another vote?
      Wednesday. I voted in a referendum and now I’m not so sure. Can we have another vote?
      Thursday. I voted in a referendum and now I’m not so sure. Can we have another vote?

      No you can’t have another vote. We will enact the result of the first referendum. Then, if you don’t like it, a political party can put in their manifesto that they will hold another referendum and, if they get voted into power, you can have it.

    • Edward2
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

      Another remainer extremist says we will all die if we leave.
      Project Fear reaches the highest point.

      • Steve
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:43 pm | Permalink

        Edward2

        The inverse must also be considered; if we don’t leave then remain extremists will all die.

        Project fear advocates of the referendum MINORITY need to shut up and stop interfering with rights of the majority. They lost, end of.

    • Dave Andrews
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:57 pm | Permalink

      And what’s the question on the ballot paper? The same one as before? Surely not, why should anyone take this one seriously when the last was ignored?
      Or is there another question decided by those who lost the last referendum? Designed to divide and disenfranchise those who want to leave.
      I guarantee you, come up with your referendum question and posters on this site will pull it to bits.

  22. M Thompson
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:34 am | Permalink

    As always I shall look forward to your well constructed views. Even with some short term problems it will be a small price to pay for our Freedom.

  23. fedupsoutherner
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    You are to be admired John for all your hard work. You need a cabinet behind you that are as committed as you are to the cause and you need the British people to back a new PM and true conservative government. Well done and look forward to reading it.

    • Tom
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

      If I was JR I would be bitter and twisted.

  24. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:00 am | Permalink

    I’m sorry, JR, but I just don’t see this idea working, and in fact the more you advocate it the more you help the Remoaners to push us towards staying in the EU. As March 29th approaches and MPs have still been unable to agree on any post-Brexit arrangement amid rising dread of leaving without a deal, a horror assiduously fomented by the government itself over more than two years, there will be increasing pressure to call it all off.

    I can see the possibility of a different withdrawal agreement, or agreements, to cover the technical and practical issues of defaulting to trade on WTO terms, and a range of other matters which need to be tidied up, but not if we refuse to agree any financial settlement, even if some of it was presented as ex gratia payments rather than legal liabilities.

    I think it would have been difficult enough to persuade the Irish government to trust us that we would make no changes at all at the border and we would work hard with them to prevent the carriage into the Republic of any goods that the EU would regard as illicit, but at least that offer would have seemed reasonable to the wider world.

    To be honest I don’t care about the £39 billion you keep on about, even as an unjustified ransom payment, as much as I care about breaking free of the EU. We’ve paid in about half a trillion since 1973, and another £39 billion won’t make much odds.

    • Tom
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:28 pm | Permalink

      It’s a coup by the communist political class against the rest of us. All they are doing is destroying themselves. Is this the common purpose?

  25. James
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:18 am | Permalink

    Mrs May will return with some kind words on a piece of paper. She can wave the piece of paper in the wind like the former Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain, but we will not be fooled. She needs to be replaced (and soon) by someone who believes in Brexit and in reclaiming our sovereignty. Millions of our forebears died to uphold our freedom and sovereignty, which is the birthright and most precious thing that we can bestow. I believe that a clean WTO Brexit will also galvanise our country to supreme achievements.

    • margaret
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:34 pm | Permalink

      well said James

  26. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:29 am | Permalink

    Owen Patterson keeps on about an offer supposedly made by Donald Tusk in March, which Theresa May told him yesterday would have applied only to Great Britain to the exclusion of Northern Ireland, and today in the Telegraph he says:

    “That deal foundered on the question of the Northern Ireland border, but existing techniques and processes can resolve this.”

    Well, what exactly is “the question of the Northern Ireland border”?

    It now seems to have acquired an almost mythical or metaphysical status like that of the Schleswig-Holstein Question, and according to Lord Palmerston:

    https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/767616-the-schleswig-holstein-question-is-so-complicated-only-three-men-in

    “The Schleswig-Holstein question is so complicated, only three men in Europe have ever understood it. One was Prince Albert, who is dead. The second was a German professor who became mad. I am the third and I have forgotten all about it.”

    Well, let me try to explain it to Owen Patterson and others in simple terms: because the Irish Republic could easily lose a greater percentage of its GDP from a badly managed Brexit than any other country, including the UK, the Irish government wants to keep as much of the UK as possible under as much EU law as possible, in particular under the rules of both the EU Customs Union and the EU Single Market, and it has not only raised the spectre of renewed terrorism it has threatened to veto any new treaty arrangements which do not give the Republic what it wants – and that will not change when it comes to agreeing any alternative arrangements to the so-called ‘backstop’.

  27. RichG
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:34 am | Permalink

    Again John too much emphasis on the money..all of what is happening is much more than money

    • Newmania
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:34 pm | Permalink

      Can I have some of yours then ?

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

        Newmania. That’s rich coming from you. You’re a remainer and so don’t mind how much you give the EU.

        • hefner
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

          Because you really think you are going to get anything from the £39bn?

          • Edward2
            Posted December 12, 2018 at 12:19 am | Permalink

            Well I know it is only the small sum of £39 billion but it could come in useful for health education welfare or even tax cuts.

    • Steve
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

      RichG

      Yes my thoughts too.

      Looks to me like it’s big business that wants a deal, not those who voted leave.

      Stuff any deal, we did not vote for one. Walk away right now on WTO terms.

  28. lojolondon
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:01 pm | Permalink

    John, there is a stron feeling that the whole “backstop” thing (translation from French??) has been set up from the beginning as a fake point, Mrs May said in Parliament that there is loads of opposition to it so she will try to fix that problem. I worry that people will drop their opposition to an entirely bad deal if she “goes into Europe and, through tough negotiation, removes the backstop”.

    The rest of the deal is still entirely poisonous, just the single line where the ECJ gets to decide is fatal, because they decide exactly what they are told to decide by the Commission.

  29. DanB
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:07 pm | Permalink

    So now it’s down to who has the bigger guns, the ERG or the EU?

  30. Mike Wilson
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:10 pm | Permalink

    This has now degenerated into farce. I was beginning to form a vaguely positive opinion of May – for her capacity for what I assume is hard work and her resilience. But, this is not just mad – it’s stupid.

    If she had held the vote and been soundly beaten, she could have gone back to the EU and said ‘They won’t have it, we have to come up with something better.’ And they would have had to take her seriously. But, instead of that, she has cancelled the vote and trotted off to see other EU leaders who won’t take her, or this country, seriously.

    She really, really is not up to the job. How she got there in the first place is anyone’s guess after her ineffective stint at the Home Office. How did she do with the old immigration figures?

    She started out on the wrong foot. When the EU first said ‘we will not discuss the future trading arrangement until after we agree the withdrawal agreement’ – that’s when she should have said ‘No, we discuss everything or we discuss nothing’. And it has been downhill ever since. Who told her she was able to negotiate?

    She has turned this country into a laughing stock. And still Tory MPs stand like sheep behind her and let it happen with their pathetic protestations of loyalty. I’ll never forgive the Tory Party for this. You are watching the end of the Tory Party.

  31. acorn
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:27 pm | Permalink

    I have read Steve Baker’s https://www.stevebaker.info/2018/12/my-position-on-the-prime-ministers-eu-exit-deal/ and all the links in it. I am not sure how he thinks the TFA Trade Facilitation Agreement applies to Northern Ireland. A WTO policy designed to gear up lesser developed nations to compete with the big boys for mutual gain.

    Unfortunately, he is a follower of the Austrian School of economics, he needs a large dose of MMT, if he is to be any good as your Prime Minister. Get him to look at Fig 8 in https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/nationalaccounts/uksectoraccounts/bulletins/quarterlysectoraccounts/apriltojune2018#what-has-happened-to-the-net-lending-or-borrowing-positions-of-uk-sectors

    Tell him he needs to get the yellow bits above the zero line. That will require the fiscally unconstrained Treasury, to start making the light blue bits bigger (bigger budget deficit) instead of smaller. The yellow bits are running out of savings and maxing out their credit cards.

    Or, we could stop exporting our currency to the Rest of the World (RoW) for them BMWs etc. The RoW then wouldn’t have to send it back to us in the form of buying another block of flats in London that they will leave empty for a quick flip if our currency looks dodgy.

    • NickC
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 10:51 am | Permalink

      Acorn, MMT? – the Mugabe Monetary Theory?

      • acorn
        Posted December 12, 2018 at 6:29 pm | Permalink

        Oh NickC sweetheart, as if you have the faintest idea about what sectoral balances represent in a fiat currency economy.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 3:09 pm | Permalink

      Of course the TFA applies to the trade between the UK and the EU member states, including the trade across the Irish border, why should it not?

    • libertarian
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:05 pm | Permalink

      acorn

      MMT… ha ha ha All that cutting and pasting you do of long winded economics theories and then you come up with MMT… Laughing my head off.

      • acorn
        Posted December 13, 2018 at 11:45 am | Permalink

        Libby, be careful you don’t wake up the other inmates!

  32. KZB
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:30 pm | Permalink

    Notice the vote was only cancelled AFTER the ECJ ruling on the revocability of Article 50 was announced.
    The vote was not cancelled because it would fail. That it would fail has been obvious for weeks. The reason is the ECJ ruling.
    PM has immediately run off to Europe and we don’t know the truth about why.
    BBC has gone into full-on Peoples’ Vote mode.
    And people still say “there was no plan” !

    • Stred
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

      First stop Berlin to see the real boss. Next Brussels to see Herr Selmayr, her adjutant.

      • margaret howard
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

        You’ve forgotten to mention the war!

        • L Jones
          Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:25 pm | Permalink

          Don’t be facetious, Margaret. It doesn’t suit you.

          • margaret howard
            Posted December 12, 2018 at 1:08 am | Permalink

            Sorry -:)

          • Mark B
            Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:16 am | Permalink

            Oh it does.

        • libertarian
          Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:09 pm | Permalink

          Margaret Howard

          Actually its the EU and you remainers that have forgotten to mention the war. You know the one that happened in Europe whilst you all claim that the EU has maintained peace for 60 years

          ( hint 1991-2001 )

  33. Ron Olden
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    This ‘Managed Brexit’ is, presumably, variation on what we used to call ‘Blind Brexit.’

    It’s what I myself have argued for from the start and it’s easily the best option.

    My approach would be to simply let the Treaties lapse on March 29th, and both the UK, and the EU do nothing.

    We leave all our existing trade and regulatory arrangements in place voluntarily and then start talking again.

    The spectre of Remaining would be gone and both sides would diverge in the future when and where, it’s in our interests to do so.

    If at some point later we decide to pay the EU for something then so be it. We can do so if we conclude it’s worth the money.

  34. Stewart Roberts
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 12:43 pm | Permalink

    Could someone please tell me why , if we sign the withdrawal agreement,we can’t just leave on WTO terms at the end of the implementation period (and/or any extension to it) if there is no acceptable Free Trade Agreement on the table?

    This gives us two perhaps three years to get a good FTA …AND prepare properly for no deal. It also means that, in effect, leaving on WTO terms becomes the UK veto on the backstop.

    Obviously we would need to back end our payments for withdrawal so that we pay a lot less if we eventually leave on WTO terms.

    If the EU say there is some reason that we cannot do this it makes it very clear, to me at least, that the backstop is indeed a legal trap to keep us in.

    Thoughts?

    and Merry Christmas

    Pitfox

  35. Roy Grainger
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:03 pm | Permalink

    To leave on WTO terms you need a Prime Minister who wants to leave on WTO terms. But the large majority of Conservative MPs are apparently happy to continue with one who doesn’t so it a hypothetical discussion.

  36. Old person
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    This tiresome argument for a second referendum continues with remainers bleating that 16 and 17 year olds did not have a vote in 2016.

    Why doesn’t someone shoot down this disingenuous argument. No one under the age of 61 has ever voted to join the ‘trade’ agreement of the European Communities.

    The electorate from the ages of 18 to 61 voted on this issue for the first time.

    They voted to leave – just deliver it.

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:29 pm | Permalink

      @ Old person

      Brilliant entry

  37. fedupsoutherner
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

    21st January for a vote on the WA? Is May having a laugh? I would hope that the Tory party would have got rid of her by then. If not, then they are lacking any courage and their convictions. What a way to run a government.

  38. Bob
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:49 pm | Permalink

    The BBC’s desperation to subvert the referendum result is palpable. They’re dragging in the Remainers one after the other to propagate “no deal” scare stories. They had Ken Clarke just now who spoke of Mrs May’s withdrawal agreement in glowing terms.

    The national broadcaster is a national disgrace and far from public service they are doing us a disservice. We should not be coerced into funding this organisation.

    The only party wholly committed to Brexit is UKIP, and they would also abolish the BBC TV Licence.

  39. CHRISTOPHER HOUSTON
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 1:54 pm | Permalink

    So, a man is held on the ground in the Westminster Estate a little while ago with an automatic weapon pointed at his head though he was motionless because of being tasered .

    In The House they are trying to get blood out of a stone for information of any kind about anything. Now, this minute a Ten Minute Rule Bill of the astonishing revelation that cannabis like tobacco has a 10,000 year history of medicinal purposes but of the former “there is not enough of it about” and what a terrible thing it is man.
    Meanwhile I am restricted to getting just 16 tablets of aspirin per purchase.

    No-one knows the whereabouts of Mrs May. But Juncker said at dawn there was no point in her talking to anyone in Europe at all.
    Strange times.

    • Holiday rep
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:39 pm | Permalink

      Mrs May is skiing and having fun.

  40. ian
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:01 pm | Permalink

    Remain looking like the favourite choice in parliament now, with no ref, just vote between MPs if Mrs May deal is voted down, they tell you that you have the option to use article 50 in the future again but that time not now because parliament cannot agree on the way forward.

    There have already been move’s by the EU on this with, no need for the UK to join the EURO and give the UK back the full rebate from the eighties, so instead of the full increase which was planned for 2021 of 5.5 billion pounds, it might stay near the same as now, that what they will be talking about now. Corporate tax and VAT will on Mrs May mind as well for big businesses and the elite but that would be about it.

  41. Ian Pennell
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:08 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood

    I absolutely agree that if there was the support in Parliament for “No Deal”, we would save that £39 billion plus whatever annual EU contributions Britain would need to make during the transition period and (if this is what happens) a Customs Union and Single Market/ Norway style deal afterwards. But Parliament being what it is and Theresa May being who she is it is clear that this will never happen in practice until/ unless we have a Prime Minister who really believes in Brexit and a majority of MPs in Parliament who do so too!

    I have posted recently on your website a Strategy to break this impasse- but the Conservative back- bench MPs are so wary of further upsetting the apple-cart that they want to stick to nurse for fear of worse. But it will indeed be worse if Theresa May is not kindly relived of her duties quickly with a Brexiteer Prime Minister not sought out instead! Jeremy Corbyn will win the next General Election (whenever that occurs) and we will – to all intents and purposes- have no Brexit whatsoever, let alone a “Managed No Deal Brexit”.

    Why Sir do you and your Conservative colleagues not jump about and do something to stop this disastrous state of affairs (i.e. Labour and no actual Brexit) unfolding?

    Ian Pennell

  42. agricola9
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:24 pm | Permalink

    Here is an idea. Lets leave on 29 March not having signed any WA. Let us make it clear to the EU that there are aspects of the WA that we like , treatment of EU/UK expat citizens for instance, but only when this is agreed do we pay them half of the £39billion.
    Prior to our March end exit of the EU we should make clear that our intention is to trade on WTO terms. However if they wish to continue trading as at present then this is acceptable providing they enter into discusions on a new free trade treaty with the UK on goods and services. When this treaty is signed they get the second half payment of the £39 billion.
    If the final means of trade are on WTO terms we should tell the EU that we have no intention of creating a physical border in Ireland , it will be handled electronically just as it is with all other nations we trade with. TheEU can do as they wish on thd Eire side of the border, but if it is malicous it could lead to the end of what little trade there is. If the EU accept my route to tariff free trade then no problem with the Irish border.
    I look forward to your elaboration of any future relationship with the EU.

  43. oldtimer
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 2:26 pm | Permalink

    Lord Ashcroft has published his latest polling (based on a respectable sample of 5000, here:
    https://www.conservativehome.com/platform/2018/12/lord-ashcroft-my-new-brexit-poll-people-are-tipping-further-away-from-mays-deal.html

    This examines several questions related to May’s deal (disliked) and other preferences from the point of view of both Conservative and Labour Leavers and Remainers. If rejected by parliament (an opportunity that has been denied by May so far) the majority view was the UK should seek a renegotiation and failing that exit with no deal. failing that should exit with no deal.

  44. Denis Cooper
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 3:11 pm | Permalink

    Just a reminder that Theresa May gratuitously took on responsibility to ensure that the EU and the Irish government do not erect any barriers on their side of the Irish border, and even though both have said that they have no intention of doing so:

    https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-speech-on-our-future-economic-partnership-with-the-european-union

    “We have been clear all along that we don’t want to go back to a hard border in Ireland. We have ruled out any physical infrastructure at the border, or any related checks and controls.

    But it is not good enough to say, ‘We won’t introduce a hard border; if the EU forces Ireland to do it, that’s down to them’. We chose to leave; we have a responsibility to help find a solution.”

    And her preferred solution is to sacrifice the interests of the people she is supposed to be serving to satisfy the unreasonable demands of the Irish government, when in my view it would have been quite enough to offer to pass a new UK law to control what goods could be driven across the border into the Republic and so into the EU Single Market.

    Which more reasonable solution is what I suggested to her in a letter published in her local newspaper, the Maidenhead Advertiser, back in April:

    https://www.maidenhead-advertiser.co.uk/news/letters-to-the-editor/130695/irish-border-a-problem-for-the-eu-not-the-uk.html

    “Irish border a problem for the EU not the UK”

    “Our Prime Minister’s “turn the other cheek” approach to negotiations with the EU may be consistent with her Christian upbringing, but it is not necessarily in the national interest.

    To take just the latest humiliation which the EU is proposing to heap upon our bowed heads, our over-conciliatory government has supinely accepted that the land border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic represents a problem for us, when in reality it is a problem for them.

    For the past quarter of a century we have been happy to allow goods to flow into the UK across that border without any attempt to intercept and inspect them, because we trust they will conform to EU Single Market standards and therefore they do not need to be checked.

    That will not change when we leave the EU, that is not unless the EU arbitrarily decides to allow EU producers and exporters to break EU laws and send rubbish over the border.

    In contrast the EU cannot assume that the trickle of goods moving the other way from the UK into the Irish Republic and the rest of the EU will continue to conform to EU standards once we have left the EU, and that could create a problem.

    However the problem will be for them, not for us as they like to pretend; in principle we could just tell them we will do nothing to restrict the present free flow of goods coming in from the Republic, and it is entirely up to them to decide what they want to do on their side of the border.

    On the other hand we could decide to overlook their unreasonable attitude and helpfully offer to enact and enforce new UK laws to prevent any goods which the EU would find unacceptable being exported across the border into the EU, and if they were prepared to trust us on that it might at least ease their near-paranoid concern about the integrity of their precious Single Market.”

    She had this suggested to her directly, but despite her assistant replying that she had taken the ideas on board she then proceeded to do the opposite – which is one of the reasons why she, and we, are now in this fix.

  45. ian
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 3:28 pm | Permalink

    Leave could make a comeback if remain MPs decide not to vote against the people of the UK and 27 EU country have done the paperwork for the UK citizens and goods as will the UK.

    Talk of lorry park at Dover is a waste of time so is everything else remainers talk about, the 27 countries are not the EU and will not cut their noses off to spite their faces, especially with world recession coming to europe next year, that be a silly move by them wouldn’t, they want to keep the many UK gov contract they enjoy now along with food they sell us, nobody else will buy their food, it too expensive for other countries to buy and they will lose jobs and as for tariffs, it won’t happen, not by them anyway, they cannot afford them because job loses and lose trade, if no deal goes through everybody will be surprised that trade has speeded up with the 27 countries in europe wanting to do more business with the UK.

  46. PaulDirac
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

    Here is a fact: the DUP has left this government as a hostage to fortune. Any minor problem will precipitate its demise.
    The cause of this lay solely on TM’s shoulders, she is the architect, designer and author of this surrender document.

    As long as TM is our PM and Hammond the exchequer we will have no real Brexit, they are dead-set to produce a BRINO.
    The first order of the day is to vote down this surrender document, followed closely by a defenestration of TM, all other avenues lead to BRINO or worse.

  47. Bryan Harris
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

    I want to know when a eurosceptic Tory is going to challenge May? There surely must be enough support for a stalking horse?

    Reply You don’t need a stalking horse. 48 letters have to be sent in to secure a vote on no confidence in the PM. If majority of Conservative MPs have no confidence then we proceed automatically to a full leadership election.

    • Caterpillar
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:41 pm | Permalink

      It is odd that so many Conservatives were prepared to vote against the WA, but not against the person responsible for it.

      • Turboterrier.
        Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

        @ Caterpillar

        If the news is right 48 letters have been sent in.

        But will it out her? With the majority of chicken hearted, two faced back stabbing lot we have representing us at Westminster all hell bent in getting elevated to the upper house for exceptional service to the party and country , I will not be holding my breath

    • Bryan Harris
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:31 am | Permalink

      @JR – Yes, I get that – but wouldn’t a stalking horse get the process going more quickly – It seems we will wait forever to get an acknowledgement of the 48 letters of no confidence.

      Reply As I explained before, as soon as the 48 letters were in a vote has been called

      • Bryan Harris
        Posted December 12, 2018 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

        Thanks – that point is settled for now – but are we going to see enough support to oust May? That is today’s question….

  48. Maybot
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

    I see yet another old Leave voter has tried to raid Parliament today.

  49. Roy Grainger
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 5:03 pm | Permalink

    I see reports says May told EU officials 24hrs before she was cancelling the WA vote, before she told the cabinet, and then still sent Gove out to say it wasn’t being cancelled. You have to laugh don’t you ? Serves him right.

    • Bryan Harris
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 7:34 am | Permalink

      It’s worse than an insult to Gove, who probably deserves it – May has once again chosen to keep the EU better informed than The House.

      Are there no protocols that can be brought to bear against this traitorous woman?

  50. Den
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

    “Crashing Out” yuk! Yet another spin scare tactic used by the deluded Europhiles. Emotive words to alarm the gullible. Why do you EU lovers, insist on bullying people into your point of view? That MO was used by both Hitler and Stalin before you and of course, says a lot about your future intentions. EU army? Scary!
    I much prefer scintillating words as “Moving forward” and “Brighter future” because right now, the EU looks like an oldie, a 195os Kremlin controlled organisation that is imploding. Outdated, outmoded and out of steam with no chance of changing the boiler.
    Our true and prosperous future lies with the much bigger and more amenable, Rest of the World, with a population of ten times that of the EU. A huge market is there outside of the Brussels Empire and a place where the EU is rapidly becoming a mere bit player. Make Britain Great again – Leave the EU.

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 10:19 pm | Permalink

      @ Den

      The EU looks like an oldie, a 195os Kremlin controlled organisation that is imploding.

      Well said Den absolutely correct.

    • L Jones
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:34 pm | Permalink

      You are absolutely right, Den. Spot on.
      In fact, why do we never get a remainer here telling us WHY we should wish to stay shackled? Why don’t we ever hear them extolling the Great and Glorious EU and describing its Golden Future that we might share? Why don’t they ever tell us WHY they believe it’s the best thing since sliced brot?

  51. Nicholas Murphy
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

    I gather that the top limit of our legal obligation to the EU was £8 bn – and even that was legally contestable. That May has agreed to hand over nearly $40 bn, and that the Chancellor is content for her to do so, shames this government.
    P.S. And as an aside, I tried to join the Conservative Party two weeks ago. My application was not accepted by your website – so I’ve signed up as a supporter of the DUP instead, despite not living in Northern Ireland.

  52. DanB
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:44 pm | Permalink

    It’s a Withdrawal agreement..so after we get the agreement for a future deal it will become a footnote. The only thing holding up the WA is the NI border backstop provision which is really only for a last resort situation. However it may be possible to get around all of this if the UK government gives a guarantee, that in the case of no future agreement it will instead facilitate a poll allowing for Irish unification.

    • Jack snell
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:30 pm | Permalink

      Great, Steve Baker thinks Boris, DD or Raab suitable for the PM’S job. Boris a failed Foreign Secretary, DD a failed chief negotiator or Raab who didn’t last the pace either? Think we can agree any one of them will be a good choice for leaving without a deal?

  53. Javelin
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 6:54 pm | Permalink

    Do MPs realise every day that goes by loses another Conservative MP.

    If not they clearly not understand what is going on outside their little bubble.

  54. Lynn Atkinson
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 8:17 pm | Permalink

    The Referendum explicitly demanded a WTO Leave – the £9 million leaflet made pellucidly clear that was what a Leave vote meant. Parliament must hold the Government to account and we the People will hold Parliament to account. Remain MPs on all sides of the House will reap the whirlwind! Let’s cash in sooner rather than later!
    Redwood for nr 10 or 11! Let’s try a clever man just for a change!

  55. Javelin
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

    48 letters.

    I don’t believe for one second that 48 letters weren’t received weeks ago. Graham stretched the rules to breaking point to give May a sporting chance.

    The rules allow some flexibility. It’s a shame the 1922 lost credibility.

    I have INSIDER knowledge. May was told weeks ago she was on borrowed time.

    When the truth comes out the 1922 committee is finished.

  56. Andy
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 9:10 pm | Permalink

    Having seen the devastating analaysis of what no deal means any MP who pushes for it will clearly be committing a crime against their country and constituents.

    The ultimate personal consequences for those MPs are perfectly evident. The next generation will hold them to account and will bring them to justice.

    • Al
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 12:11 am | Permalink

      **Having seen the devastating analaysis of what no deal means any MP who pushes for it will clearly be committing a crime against their country and constituents.**

      I take it you would say the same of those who voted for the CFP and its devastating impact on fisheries and coastal towns?

      Or those who implemented EU VAT, with its devastating effect on small business in the digital and creative sectors?

  57. Steve
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:02 pm | Permalink

    Suggestions now appearing that May might be going face first into a no confidence vote.

    Let’s hope so. We won’t need a general election, just balls in No 10. Someone we can send to the EU who is not afraid to lay into them, and is not owned by the CBI.

  58. Colin Hart
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:38 pm | Permalink

    My wife and I were utterly appalled by the way the Wark person treated you on Newsnight tonight. She constantly interrupted you and didn’t allow you to finish any of the points you were making. Her body language toward you said it all. And then she turned to the SNP woman and gave her a very soft ride.
    Newsnight is now finally confirmed as the Guardian with moving pictures. No point in going on it.

    • Tweeter_L
      Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:58 pm | Permalink

      Colin H: I do so agree! How Dr Redwood kept his cool I just don’t know. Wark was utterly fixated on the personality/political issue and didn’t really want to hear about anything else: a typical self-important presenter who treats politics as a soap-opera and nothing more. I only watched Newsnight by accident: usually these days I know better!

    • Peter
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 12:01 am | Permalink

      I saw that interview too. I could see the apprehension in Mr. Redwood ‘Here we go!’

      Wark went straight into bait and switch mode. Introduction mentioned ‘Managed Exit’ but the opening question invited comments on a confidence vote on Mrs. May. Mr. Redwood visibly bridled at this diversion and pushed the discussion back on track. Wark asked questions but interrupted. When the car industry was mentioned she cut the answer to chip in with a remark about pharmaceuticals. The interview was brief and the Scottish MP was allowed to state her case -about a vote of no confidence with Labour without interruption.

      Proof that the BBC do not really wish to explore clean Brexit options. They invite Brexiteers on to voice the case against them rather than to listen to what Brexiteers actually have to say.

    • Captain Peacock
      Posted December 12, 2018 at 1:50 am | Permalink

      No point in going on ANY UK media for the truth just look how the Daily Mail has changed. For example the UN treaty on migration the Mail ran this item with ‘ comments not moderated’ yet 2 comments I sent saying no Arab state has signed up to this treaty they would not print.
      ‘In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.’
      George Orwell

  59. Dennis
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:51 pm | Permalink

    On the Marr Show this Sunday both he and Boris agreed that ‘money’ is to be paid. That’s all anyone says about it – no details whatsoever.

  60. Nicholas Odoni
    Posted December 11, 2018 at 11:52 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr Redwood,

    I saw you on “Newsnight” just now, and was outraged by the way you were treated by Kirsty Wark. How on earth you held your temper, I just do not know. Her ‘interview’ was a parody of what one would have a right to expect, just deplorable.

    If – Heaven forbid – we end up in a second (third?) referendum, or a General Election, would you please ensure you never lose an opportunity to highlight the pro-EU bias of the BBC evidenced in its political programmes and Brexit coverage. The IEA has conducted research into this, published on this link:
    https://iea.org.uk/media/iea-analysis-shows-systemic-bias-against-leave-supporters-on-flagship-bbc-political-programmes/
    If anyone doubts the results, I can only suggest you have a go doing the research yourself (as I myself have), concentrating on either “Any Questions” or “Question Time”. I am afraid it won’t take you long to realise that the IEA is correct. The statistics quantifying the bias are clear enough, and the level of the BBC’s pro-Remain bias that is revealed is truly shocking.

  61. mancunius
    Posted December 12, 2018 at 2:18 am | Permalink

    Oh happy day, calloo callay… I see Christmas has come early.

    Now for God’s sake this time just make sure you and your colleagues elect the right man for the job.

  • 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