My speech yesterday on the United Kingdom Internal Market Bill

Sir John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con): I support the Government’s amendments to the legislation for the reasons outlined admirably by the Minister—it did need a little strengthening and this is a welcome clarification—but I rise mainly to oppose new clause 1.

I am disappointed with the official Opposition, because I was delighted after the clear decision of the people in the last general election that the Opposition said that they now fully accepted the result of the referendum, although it took place years ago—the previous Parliament blocked its timely implementation. We had a rerun in the general election and the Opposition fully accepted the verdict of that general election, yet here we are again today, with new clause 1 deliberately trying to undermine the British Government’s sensible negotiating position in the European Union.

Whenever there is a disagreement in interpretation of that original withdrawal agreement between the United Kingdom and the European Union, the Opposition and most of the other opposition parties rush to accept the EU’s—very political—interpretation of the situation and rush to say that anything the UK Government wish to assert in this Parliament, or in a court of law if it came to that, is clearly illegal.

It is preposterous that we have so many MPs who so dislike the people of this country that they are still trying to thwart the very clear wish to have a Brexit that makes sense.

Karin Smyth (Bristol South) (Lab): Will the right hon. Gentleman give way?

Sir John Redwood: I must not take up too much time. I wish to develop my argument quickly.

We have to recognise what we are dealing with here. The EU withdrawal agreement was pretty unsatisfactory and one-sided because the previous Parliament stopped the Government putting a strong British case and getting the support of this Parliament in the way the British people wanted. The Prime Minister wisely went to Europe and did his best to amend the withdrawal agreement but it was quite clear from the agreed text that a lot was outstanding and rested to be resolved in the negotiations to be designed around the future relationship, because we used to say that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed and that the withdrawal terms had to run alongside the future relationship.

The EU won that one thanks to the dreadful last Parliament undermining our position all the time. This Prime Minister is trying to remedy that and the only ​reason I was able to vote for the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018—much of it was an agreement that I knew had lots of problems with it—was that we put in clause 38, a clear assertion of British sovereignty against the possibility that the EU did not mean what it said in its promises to my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister and did not offer that free trade agreement, which was going to be at the core of the new relationship. We therefore needed that protection, so I am pleased that the Government put it in.

That made me able to vote for the measure to progress it to the next stage, but I was always clear that the EU then needed to get rid of all its posturing and accept what it had said and signed up to—that the core of our new relationship was going to be a free trade agreement. We were going to be a third country, we were not going to be under its laws and we were not going to be in its single market and customs union, but it has systematically blocked that free trade agreement. The UK has tabled a perfectly good one based on the agreements the EU has offered to other countries that it did not have such a close relationship with, but it has not been prepared to accept it. Well, why does it not table its own? Why does it not show us what it meant when it signed up to having a free trade agreement at the core of our relationship? If it will not, we will leave without a deal and that will be a perfectly good result for the British people, as I said before the referendum and have always said subsequently.

Of course, it would be better if we could resolve those matters through that free trade agreement. As colleagues will know, many of the problems with the Northern Ireland protocol fall away if we have that free trade agreement, and we are only in this position because the EU is blocking it.

Why is the EU blocking the agreement? It says that it wants to grab our fish. I have news for it: they are not on offer. They are going to be returned to the British people, I trust. I am always being told by Ministers that they are strong on that. The EU wishes to control our law making and decide what state aid is in the United Kingdom. No, it will not. We voted to decide that within the framework of the World Trade Organisation and the international rules that govern state aid—rules, incidentally, that the EU regularly breaks. It has often been found guilty of breaking international state aid rules and has been fined quite substantially as a result.

I support the Government’s amendments, and I support this piece of legislation. We need every bit of pressure we can to try to get the free trade agreement and the third-country relationship with the EU that we were promised by it and by the Government in the general election. We can then take the massive opportunities of Brexit. It is crucial that new clause 1 is not agreed to, because it would send a clear message to the European Union that this Parliament still wants to give in.

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

189 Comments

  1. None of the above
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:29 am | Permalink

    Sir John, may I congratulate you on an excellent speach. It was passionately delivered and I detected not a little anger but it was admirably controlled. You summed up my sentiments exactly. Thank you.

    • Hope
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

      JR, Frost is proposing a three year transition on fishing to give EU time to adjust! Unbelievable. 7 Years from the time we voted to leave.

      Please just get Johnson out of office. This charade has gone on long enough.

      • glen cullen
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

        If the EU gets a further 3 year fishing transition period I will vote for the Brexit party, the Labour party – hell any party apart from the Tory party

        • Hope
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:27 pm | Permalink

          Tim Bradshaw writes a good article in Con Woman today. Suggest you read JR. He also explains Prof Prinns and Gen Riley view of our military being trapped under EU control.

          A good question why our troops under EU flag in Bosnia not UN or NATO? We need alternative for Galileo for military not be trapped under EU control, exactly opposite to remainer Tobias Elwood’s MP view.

      • beresford
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

        I don’t mind being nice to the EU in the fishing negotiation by tapering their quota, but it has nothing to do with the trade deal and we shouldn’t be backing down again. We know that conceding EU demands leads to more EU demands. What are the odds that as soon as the quota is due to be reduced by the taper the EU threaten to ‘break international law’ by reneging on the trade deal?

      • Peter
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:09 pm | Permalink

        Fudges emerge, but the government hope covid news will crowd out discussion.

        Seems pretty clear that the government will not go for WTO exit and the EU are aware of this.

        I expect some sort of deal dressed up as a ‘victory’. Conservatives desperately hoping voters forget by the time of the next election.

        • glen cullen
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

          100% true

    • Mark B
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

      +1

    • Lynn Atkinson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

      +1

  2. glen cullen
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:31 am | Permalink

    Sir John, thank you for supporting the referendum result, democracy and for following the wishes of the people

  3. Martin in Cardiff
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    Any obligations stemming from the referendum result have ALL been discharged.

    The UK has LEFT.

    The post-exit relationship with the European Union has not been the subject of any referendum however, and so the Opposition are perfectly and wholly free to oppose any proposal by the Government in that regard without in any way engaging their stated respect for the referendum result.

    Disagreements over that will – quite properly – be the subjects of competing manifestoes come election times, and that will be the case for very many years, I think.

    So John’s attempt to portray the opposition as having broken their word is groundless on that basis.

    • a-tracy
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

      During the transition, the EU’s writ over Britain will apply not only to existing laws – which British ministers and officials have been able to shape – but also to all new laws which will be framed by the EU without any input from the UK (Article 128).

      If the EU can disregard clause 38 can the UK just disregard any clauses to suit?

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:02 pm | Permalink

      I think people in the ‘red wall’ that voted Tory for the first time in their lives would agree that Labour sold them out.

    • czerwonadupa
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

      Do you still pay membership fees demanded by the club secretary after leaving the cricket, tennis or gym club? Having left do you still pay for their expansionist plansfor more courts? Or do you like the BBC think everyone should pay their excessive demands in spite of not belonging to the club anymore?

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:57 pm | Permalink

      Martin, We have not left. Nor LEFT. The tool the EU uses to remain in control of the UK is different – the Withdrawal Agreement now, rather than the TEU and TFEU before – but the effect is the same.

      The Referendum choice was to Leave, not remain under EU control. The post exit relationship by definition must be one where the EU cannot control the UK in any way. It still hasn’t happened yet, over four years later.

      • Lynn Atkinson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:07 pm | Permalink

        +1. Shocking really! We need to walk next week.

  4. Fred H
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:39 am | Permalink

    EXCELLENT.
    I fear we are not going to get a Free Trade Agreement, the EU maintaining a position of delay, prevarication and obstruction. A message consistent from the start – nobody leaves.
    We’ve got you tied up and no escapologists will free themselves!

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

      Don’t be silly Fred, the UK has left.

      However, you can’t change the physical fact that the UK is near-surrounded by and adjoins the European Union, from which it has hitherto received hundreds of billions a year in commercial revenues – of the same order as its trade with the entire rest of the world combined.

      The implications of that are absolutely inescapable.

      • Edward2
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:07 am | Permalink

        We only get some of our own money back from the EU and end with a £90 billion a year trade deficit.

        The UK has not left the EU yet.
        We still pay them billions and we still are obliged to follow their laws rules regulations and directives.

      • Fred H
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:08 am | Permalink

        Implications being?

      • NickC
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:12 am | Permalink

        Martin, The UK remains under EU control. That is not Leave by any sane definition.

  5. Iain Gill
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    well said

    but dont take your eye off the ball of the things we would not approve of being sneaked into the supposed free trade agreements we are doing with other countries. we should not be giving immigration and visa rights away for the basic right to trade.

  6. Polly Smith
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:45 am | Permalink

    How foolish you will feel and look when Boris betrays you like he betrays everyone

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:06 pm | Permalink

      Our political system gave us a choice between Johnson and Corbyn. What a choice! The poor citizens of the USA get to choose between Trump and Biden. What is it with political systems!

      • Lynn Atkinson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:08 pm | Permalink

        +1. Shocking really! We need to walk next week.

      • Lynn Atkinson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:09 pm | Permalink

        I would take Trump over Thatcher!

        • Martin in Cardiff
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

          I have no doubt whatsoever that you would, Lynn.

    • beresford
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:40 pm | Permalink

      We know about Boris, that is why we are watching him like a hawk. Only two weeks now to the middle of October. If there is any backsliding on leaving the EU beyond that date then Tory MPs should start talking to the 1922 Committee about a leadership challenge.

    • Jan
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:55 pm | Permalink

      Exactly Polly, I am absolutely fed up with government of any hue. Sorry Mr Redwood, I think your a decent chap, but,
      the MP’s in Parliament now, have no idea about the British people, they have had private education, Uni, into a public job (well paid). Then, because they have got contacts, government, yes I know there are a few *normal people* but they really have no say.
      This country is now under a dictator.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:01 pm | Permalink

      Polly, I said last year that Boris was the best of a bad bunch – we could have had Matt Hancock! But yes, I fear a Boris betrayal. Or many little betrayals. He is not a sound man, and still less so after his covid19 illness.

  7. Garland
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:51 am | Permalink

    The first class any student takes in international law and politics makes clear that national law can never excuse a breach of international law. Did you really think clause 38 had any effect on the UK’s commitments to the EU? If you did, you literally don’t know the first thing about international law

    • Ian Wragg
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

      International law is a vague concept and cannot be used to the detriment of a sovereign state.
      One sided treaties are frequently broken, others have caused war.
      The EU is a bullying disaster area and we are right to be leaving.
      Under your scenario we would never have been able to leave the EU.

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

        Law is a vague concept to the Right.

        There – sorted.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

          And the left it seems.
          Seen the protests in London and various USA states?

        • Lynn Atkinson
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:11 pm | Permalink

          Law is very specific. That is the objective. And simple, after all everyone needs to know what is expected of them. When the PM does not know what the law enacted yesterday is, how can you expect a Consett cafe owner to know?

    • Sir Joe Soap
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

      So you’re saying that an intelligent MP elected democratically can read words with a straightforward meaning in his own language which can then be overturned by external forces without any democratic recourse?
      Democracy trumps decisions made elsewhere for us without any democratic mandate.
      Otherwise long ago we’d all have knelt before the Third Reich.

    • a-tracy
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

      Garland, let me understand what you’re saying at 0951, do none of the clauses have any real effect then such as these clauses – “The agreement states that EU law will continue to have ‘the same legal effects as those which it produces within the Union and its Member States’ (Article 127). And the jurisdiction of the ECJ over the UK will be unaffected (Articles 86 and 131).” can the UK just disregard clauses too?

    • Edward2
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

      I’m sure they do teach that Garland.
      If a nation cannot make, amend and cancel its own laws then it isn’t a free nation.
      You prefer the globalist view.
      World government by unelected technocrats.
      But you are in a minority.
      Where is this international law you speak about?
      Do you mean the UN?

      • bill brown
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

        Edward 2

        As already said you really do not get it do you about international law?

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:12 am | Permalink

          Yes I do.
          National democracy is the key thing if you want to live in a free democratic sovereign nation.
          Where people vote for government that makes their laws.

          Do you bill or do you want to be ruled by some nelected supranational entity?
          Actually I already know the answer to that.

          • bill brown
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:56 am | Permalink

            No you do not and there are no supranational entities in internatinal law

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 2:16 pm | Permalink

            Yes because the EU isnt recognised as a nation state in international law.
            So your argument is a non starter.

        • NickC
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:16 am | Permalink

          Bill B, Well, you certainly don’t “understand” international law, that’s for sure. Nor do you understand that states have the right to abrogate bi-lateral, and multi-lateral, treaties.

          • bill brown
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:57 am | Permalink

            Nick C

            I never said they could not do so but they usually do it by negotiations , not by new legislation four months later without consultation.

            Wake up or read more

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 2:18 pm | Permalink

            So you agree free sovereign nations can make change and cancel laws in their own parliaments.
            Glad the penny has dropped bill.

    • Mockbeggar
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:07 pm | Permalink

      You should read the article in Politea by Martin Howe QC

    • czerwonadupa
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:02 pm | Permalink

      Didn’t a Mr Chamberlain come back with a signed agreement from Europe that was not kept to by one of the signatories?

  8. Mick
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:51 am | Permalink

    Like the Labour Party mislead the electorate in the 2017 election saying that they would abide the referendum result, in by saying this gaining votes from the conservatives knowing full well they were totally against us leaving the dreaded Eu as it showed in Parliament 2017-2019, but the public were wise to there deception along with all the other Eu loving mps in the 2019 GE there by giving them a good kicking and yet they still seem along with some conservatives to keep us tied to the Eu one way or another

  9. ukretired123
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    Well said and Crystal clear after parliamentary muddy waters, quicksand and fog-laden years courtesy of hypocritical MPs who pretended to implement Brexit. Many thanks for your courage and resilience.

  10. Tabulazero
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:56 am | Permalink

    The Brexit narrative looks to have move to the famous « stab in the back » of the inter-war period. At no point do the Brexiters take ownership of what they voted for.

    You should be happy with your Brexit… yet you keep complaining and blaming others.

    • Lynn Atkinson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

      We have no Brexit yet, but we will be very happy when we get it.

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:08 pm | Permalink

      This. De it looks nothing like ‘my Brexit’. So I will moan about it.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:06 pm | Permalink

      Tabulazero, I will take ownership of Leave – when I get it. If the EU remains in control of the UK then we have not left the EU, and that isn’t Leave by definition.

    • Tabulazero
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:42 pm | Permalink

      Moans. More moans and additional moans.

      • NickC
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:18 am | Permalink

        What are you moaning about this time, Tabulazero? That we might actually get to Leave?

  11. Lifelogic
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Exactly let us hope the Boris Government does not cave in on this.

  12. bill brown
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:23 am | Permalink

    Sir JR,

    Interesting presentation but exceedingy one sided both parties have broken WHO rules and we ahve broken international law with this legislation as well.

    Reply Our trade policy is under the control of the EU so it is they who break the rules.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

      Bill B, If the EU empire behaves itself (difficult to imagine, I know) then the IM Bill clauses in question will never be actioned. You claim that the UK has already broken international law. That’s false. We won’t, unless the EU does first.

      • Lynn Atkinson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:13 pm | Permalink

        The EU is repeatedly fined for breaking international law.

        • bill brown
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 9:03 am | Permalink

          Lynn Atkinson

          Can we please have some examples as they are missing again

      • bill brown
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

        NickC

        this is not how you make international treaties , so again you have the wrong end of teh stick, but what is new on that one?

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:13 am | Permalink

          The Withdrawal Agreement isnt a treaty.
          The clue is in the name.

          • bill brown
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 3:26 pm | Permalink

            Edward 2

            Look it up

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:12 pm | Permalink

            It doesn’t even come into force unless there is an agreement between the two sides.
            Look it up.

        • NickC
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:19 am | Permalink

          Bill B, Tell that to the EU.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

      Well, it’s good to see the Audi/VW execs on trial in Germany for fiddling diesel emissions, and likely to go down.

      No one has been arraigned in the US for fiddling the airworthiness certification of the Boeing 737 Max on the other hand, which cost over four hundred lives.

      Nor will they ever be, I doubt.

      • a-tracy
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:42 am | Permalink

        OOo good, is there money coming our way then in fines?

      • NickC
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:24 am | Permalink

        Martin, Five years late in Germany. And no EU action when the EU is in overall charge of environmental matters. As for the USA, you can guarantee that the victims’ lawyers will make sure that – if there was wrongdoing – the culprits will pay.

    • bill brown
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 9:04 am | Permalink

      SIr JR,

      I am afraid I must ask you to answer in mor detail as I ahve not udnerstood your reply I am afraid

      • Edward2
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 3:46 pm | Permalink

        Try re-reading the article.
        Seems pretty easy to understand for everyone else.

        • bill brown
          Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:54 am | Permalink

          Edward 2

          It was Jr’s answer not his article , read it again, my dear chap

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

            It isnt Sir John’s job to get you to understand what he has plainly said.
            What exactly is causing you problems?Perhaps I can help you on your journey of discovery?

  13. Dougg
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:42 am | Permalink

    So what it all boils down to is we have already left the bloc but we still want to bully our way to a new agreement- preferably a bespoke arrangement to suit ourselves- well sorry but it is not on offer- neither is Canada style- mabye more like Australia style- whatever that is? So make all the speeches you like but i think you’ll find EU independence and the level playing field will not be compromised.

    • Lynn Atkinson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:10 pm | Permalink

      Happy for EU independence not to be ‘compromised’ so long as UK independence is not compromised either.

      • bill brown
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 9:02 am | Permalink

        Lynn Atkinson

        Stop this nonsense the EU is not a nation so it does not have any independence

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 3:47 pm | Permalink

          Lynn never said the EU was a nation.

          • bill brown
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 3:25 pm | Permalink

            Edward 2

            Only nations have independence according to international law and the international court, according to international law. look it up my dear chap

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:10 pm | Permalink

            You can be independent of the EU
            Which is what leaving the EU is all about.

    • beresford
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:19 pm | Permalink

      Who is this ‘we’? Of course we would like an arrangement to suit ourselves, as does the EU, but we have settled for the same deal as everyone else, the one the EU wanted us to take, and are even giving them 39 billion euros we don’t owe them plus other goodies for the privilege. But as you say the EU is not obliged to have any deal with us, in which case we should cut bait and walk away. I’m not sure that refusal to trade under WTO rules is compatible with the EU’s membership of the WTO.

      • Dougg
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:13 pm | Permalink

        The 39 billion is part of the WA to allow us to withdraw in an orderly fashion- of course it can be reneged on the same as the NI Protocol- if we dare. But just to be clear we are not going to get a deal to suit ourselves- nor anything like it- not in our lifetime.

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:16 am | Permalink

          It needs reducing to take account of the extra billions the UK has paid during the years of delay since the year of the referendum result.

        • beresford
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:07 am | Permalink

          So you agree that we should cut bait and trade under WTO rules. We have traversed opposite sides of the circle but reached the same conclusion.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

      Dougg, Is this the new Remain propaganda tactic – to claim the UK is so mighty that we are bullying your poor little EU empire? It’s an interesting inversion of the truth, since it is the EU which is trying to control the UK, not the other way round. For example, is the UK demanding to take EU fish? Or is it the EU which demands control over UK EEZ fish?

      • Dougg
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:06 pm | Permalink

        The european countries as well as British have been fishing all of these grounds well before lines were ever drawn on charts so there are traditional interests reasons here. The fish are not British or French they have not got a stamp on their heads- depending on the time of year they move from zone to zone in today’s parlance

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:18 am | Permalink

          You are completely wrong Dougg
          There are international treaties agreed by all nations concerning coastal limits of territory.

        • beresford
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:11 am | Permalink

          So are you objecting to the concept of EEZs period or are you saying that we are unique in not being allowed to have one? Can we now go back to fishing off the coast of Iceland as we did for many years?

        • NickC
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:28 am | Permalink

          Dougg, I thought you Remains were ever so keen on international law? UNCLoS says the fish are the UK’s to exploit and conserve up to a 200nm limit. Not the EU’s. What happened 200 years ago for a few fishermen in small sailing boats has no relevance any more.

  14. Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    Well said

  15. agricola
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:50 am | Permalink

    A logical honest approach, lets hope it concentrates the minds of the EU when it is passed.

  16. formula57
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 10:52 am | Permalink

    The Government’s stance as embodied in the Internal Market Bill is positively Thatcheresque. I cannot praise it more highly. Well done the people’s Blue Boris!

  17. Kristo
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:05 am | Permalink

    Don’t think people outside of your own little bubble care very much about what goes on in the House. You yourself pushed for WTO rules and now that we’re facing no deal you would rather a FTA with them- it seems. It’s all getting rather tiresome.

    Reply I always said a FTA would be nice to have but WTO is fine.

    • fedupsoutherner
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 2:04 pm | Permalink

      Kristo. John has consistently said he would like a trade deal but unless it was a fair one then we would go to WTO.

      • beresford
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

        Exactly. The whole point of Brexit is to make our own trade deals, so why wouldn’t we want one with our closest neighbours? But if they are not prepared to discuss a fair deal or even one slightly weighted in their favour then many countries do fine exporting to the EU under WTO rules. However Remainers make it up as they go along so you can expect to see the same canard repeated in the coming days.

        • Dougg
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:21 pm | Permalink

          Yes exactly so why is Liz Truss not out there announcing all of these new deals we were promised by so many of the bright sparks back in 2016- have to say a lot of them seem to have gone to ground of late. With bad advise and spin am afraid we were horribly lied to

          • Edward2
            Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:19 am | Permalink

            Wrong again.
            Deals cannot be signed until after we leave on 31st December 2020.

          • NickC
            Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:30 am | Permalink

            Dougg, She is.

  18. Fishknife
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:12 am | Permalink

    1st Para: New Clause 1 – please clarify or provide link.

  19. Len Peel
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:13 am | Permalink

    Do you really believe the UK parliament can just pass an Act and that changes the terms of an international Treaty? Really? Can any country’s Parliament do this (eg could China pass a law revoking all HongKong’s privileges?) or is it only the UK Parliament that has this special power?

    Reply Yes, a country may renounce a Treaty or legislate to clarify or interpret it . A Treaty singed by the UK government needs a Statute to entrench it.

    • Ian Wragg
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

      All treaties can be abrogated. Nothing is forever.

      • Martin in Cardiff
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:50 pm | Permalink

        Yes, you can decide not to comply with the contract relating to your lender’s mortgage on your property if you like – of course you can.

        But you get thrown out of your, sorry, their house.

        The other side has redress when it is an international treaty which is broken too.

        • Edward2
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:59 pm | Permalink

          Tell us Martin.
          Are democratic nations able to decide their futures or are they ruled by some vauge unelected international body ?

        • Lynn Atkinson
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:15 pm | Permalink

          That’s what the EU did! We are throwing it out of their – oops – OUR country!

    • Len Peel
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:15 pm | Permalink

      As someone said above you don’t have a clue about international law. Every word of your reply is 100% wrong in international law. Do consult a lawyer before you post horribly wrongheaded stuff like this

      • Edward2
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

        No it isn’t
        Otherwise every nation is overruled by this concept of international law.
        You globalists must never prevail.

        • bill brown
          Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

          Edward 2

          Who are we globalists?

          the One’s who understand international law and you do not?

          • Edward2
            Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:23 am | Permalink

            I realise you like to be ruled by the EU and UN bill.
            But I prefer to vote for an MP who makes laws.
            And live in a free independent sovereign nation.

            Interesting you consider yourself a globalist even before I claimed you were.

          • NickC
            Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:34 am | Permalink

            Bill B, We’ve already established that you don’t understand international law. Nor, apparently, do you understand that the UK has a dualist constitution.

      • Mockbeggar
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:23 pm | Permalink

        As I replied to Garland above, read Martin Howe QC’s article in Politea.

      • beresford
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:49 pm | Permalink

        I can think of several countries who break international law four times before breakfast. Nobody refuses to trade with them and they aren’t collared by the ‘international police’. The truth is that Remainers want the EU to have a choke hold on us so they can then complain about the resulting bad deal.

      • NickC
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:28 pm | Permalink

        Len, Don’t be silly, the UK just abrogated the TEU and TFEU, so of course Parliament can revoke a treaty. Indeed, I urge Parliament to revoke the WA – it’s a Remain (and remain) agreement signed under duress.

        • bill brown
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 9:00 am | Permalink

          NickC

          Kindly prove the duress as you seem to be so sure we can just walk away from treaties

        • bill brown
          Posted October 2, 2020 at 7:53 am | Permalink

          NickC

          You have to sopt playing the younger brother game
          to Edward 2

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 2:21 pm | Permalink

            We are just good friends bill.
            Like you and Hefner.

    • Andy
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:16 pm | Permalink

      The UK is a ‘dualist’ state unlike most EU states which are monist states. This means that an international treaty has no effect in domestic law without a statute to give it legal effect, and it is the Act which is the ‘Law’ not the treaty. And what Parliament makes law it can unmake. Personally I would renounce the Withdrawal Agreement as it is a pile of piffle.

  20. Sir Joe Soap
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    Well exactly.

  21. Kevin
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    Dear Sir John,
    Recently the UK Constitutional Law Association has articles strongly supporting the view that the WA ties us to the EU unless it is repealed in full as proposed by writers on the Conservative Woman. Latest article link below.
    https://ukconstitutionallaw.org/2020/09/29/pavlos-eleftheriadis-the-constitutional-status-of-separation-law/
    So positive action is required on top of the IMB or we will still have a BRINO. Please do what you can. The tide is still running against a real, clean and proper Brexit.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

      Please define your “clean and proper brexit”?

      For instance, on what terms would UK trucks be permitted to drive on European Union roads?

      How would those terms be decided without any negotiation?

      You haven’t the first clue, have you?

      • Edward2
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:24 am | Permalink

        Under exactly the same rules as European lorries will require to travel on UK roads.
        If the EU play up then we just copy them.

      • beresford
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:15 am | Permalink

        On what terms should EU trucks be allowed to use British roads? How will the EU get goods to and from the ROI? It seems a reciprocal arrangement would be sensible, without any one-sided concessions from us.

      • NickC
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:42 am | Permalink

        Martin, The “clean and proper Brexit” was defined in the debate leading up to the Referendum – for the UK state to cease being controlled by the EU empire.

        The terms under which UK trucks would be permitted to drive on EU roads would be the same as for EU trucks on UK roads. That swap does not have to be part of a grand monolithic “trade deal”.

        You haven’t the first clue, have you? You see, we don’t trust the EU.

  22. a-tracy
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:23 am | Permalink

    John, you are a cut above many of our cabinet ministers.

    If you do accept any BBC interviews or C4 news they are after this silly gotcha American type of interview nowadays, it is very boorish for viewers and not very satisfactory.

    All interviewing ministers need to anticipate this better and have a file with key points. A tab with local special lockdown conditions in alphabetical order they can refer to. Or take an assistant with them and say “Well I’m not the MP from Bolton but my assistant will just check for you and we can move on to your next question” (their assistant checks the record and gives the correct information).

    If the government had better local information channels rather than trusting the BBC local news and poor readership local papers that people could check out for themselves by just inputting their home and work postcode into their smartphone all of this could go away.

    Current cabinet ministers could learn a lot watching Kayleigh McEnany she is an American political commentator who is the current White House press secretary since April 2020.

    • a-tracy
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

      Can I also add that if the newspapers, the BBC news, etc. are thinking the viewers are liking these ‘people aren’t informed attacks’ they should all look in the mirror, especially the local news channels and local radio stations and local newspapers if you aren’t getting the local decision-makers information out to your local viewers then why aren’t you telling them? The local Councils why aren’t your information channels clear? Why aren’t your websites updated and telling people? What system do local Councils have to keep residents informed?

      What I don’t understand is they’re not landing punches on the Tories over this, they’re smacking themselves in the face!

  23. Sharon
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    Very well put Mr Redwood!

    It’s clear there are still too many who will try their best to thwart a proper Brexit, including several previous PMs.

    Let’s hope good sense and loyalty to the UK prevails!

  24. George Brooks.
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    An excellent speech Sir John clearly stating how we have arrived at this current position in the negotiations and explaining how we must protect the return of our sovereignty.

    We have nothing to offer the EU except a fair free trade agreement and they have done absolutely nothing except carp about fish and state aid.

    We’d have more success dealing with a rattle snake!!!

    • beresford
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:34 pm | Permalink

      International trade deals are a cutthroat business and the EU cannot be blamed for exploiting weak and incompetent negotiators and politicians. The waters have been muddied by the likes of May and Robbins. Years of EU rule have left us with stunted leaders who are unable to show resolve or make big decisions. If unwanted illegal migrants were trying to enter Israel or Russia in dinghies, what do you think the response would be?

  25. Alan Jutson
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:46 am | Permalink

    Thank you for making and stating the very obvious.

    Amazing so many Mp’s still want us to still be subservient to the EU.

  26. Narrow Shoulders
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    A fine speech Sir John and one that gets the issues from our side on the table.

    Did any MP rebut you or did they use the non-sequitur approach of obfuscation about our responsibilities to the EU and the world and being trusted to keep treaties?

    I am particularly pleased that you got “It is preposterous that we have so many MPs who so dislike the people of this country that they are still trying to thwart the very clear wish to have a Brexit that makes sense.” on the Hansard record. It is a shame that more media outlets have not been prepared to explore this statement with you.

  27. Mike Wilson
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 12:39 pm | Permalink

    Mr. Redwood – well said. I would also applaud your allowing posts that are critical of the government and, sometimes, of you. In the undemocratic wasteland that this country’s political system has created, this site is a breath of fresh air.

    • glen cullen
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 2:42 pm | Permalink

      +1
      and what makes this blog worth reading – a balanced set of views

      • Mike Durrans
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:25 pm | Permalink

        +++

  28. chris hook
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 12:53 pm | Permalink

    Fine speech Sir John but you know in the end concessions will be made that will make a mockery of our decision to leave the EU.

  29. Alan Paul Joyce
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    It is reported that British car exports will still face EU tariffs even if there is a Brexit trade deal with UK cars that are made with parts from outside the EU unlikely to qualify for the zero-tariff deal on offer from Brussels.

    Therefore, will car exports from the EU to the UK that are made with parts from outside the EU be subject to UK tariffs?

    • Mike Wilson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:11 pm | Permalink

      One can but hope. We import far too much.

    • Peter
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:14 pm | Permalink

      Yes – another concession or fudge, in addition to fishing, that has emerged but is not front page news.

      WTO exit would make sense but I don’t see that happening, unfortunately.

    • No Longer Anonymous
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:16 pm | Permalink

      It doesn’t really matter. We won’t be having cars for very much longer – not the masses anyway. That’s the plan.

      Car manufacturers are down sizing to provide minority personal transport for zil lanes.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:31 pm | Permalink

      Alan, I should hope so! Burt with our civil service still in Remain mode I doubt it.

  30. DOM
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    Sorry, but we have nothing to thank the Tories for on this issue. A fine speech but utterly meaningless in the greater scheme of things

    I will repeat what needs to repeated ad infinitum to focus the minds of every Tory MP. It is Nigel Farage who has brought us to this point, not Cameron or May or Johnson or indeed every other Tory Eurosceptic MP

    What lesson can we learn from Farage’s success on this issue? Simple. Trusting the two main parties on any issue at all is like walking into a burning building naked. Both parties are absolute bullshysters, liars and charlatans and THEY KNOW IT

    If we now had a Reform Party government we’d now be a sovereign nation once more rather than a messed up blob that’s been subject to abuse by both parties since 1974

    You (Tory and scum Labour) continue to embrace (silent) Marxism in all its forms and then tell the people that authoritarianism is good for their soul and their safety

    • Lynn Atkinson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:15 pm | Permalink

      Just thank God that Nigel is not in any position of power. He would disappoint you mightily. This was a brilliant speech from an MP fighting our corner. Why are you so dismissive and ungrateful? Will nothing satisfy you?

    • Peter
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

      Two party system is difficult to break down. Bugging turn more likely unless one or both parties can be destroyed.

      • Peter
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:17 pm | Permalink

        Buggins turn.

    • Richard1
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:19 pm | Permalink

      Small problem: mr farage having stood for parliament on 7 or so occasions has failed to get elected. Neither UKIP nor the Brexit party succeeded either in getting MPs elected (except for 2 defectors). So there is no reason to think a Reform Party would be any more successful.

  31. Ian @Barkham
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

    Brilliantly put

  32. Ian @Barkham
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 1:45 pm | Permalink

    Thank you, all we need now is the ‘Clean Break’ we were promised, then we might start believing in the point of elected representatives.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:58 pm | Permalink

      It’s very easy to transfer a potted shrub into the open soil.

      It’s not so easy after many years to dig it up and to truncate its roots, so that it may be squeezed back into its original little pot, however.

      You might, but you’d have to take off most of its crown, which had thereto depended on the larger, extended root network.

      There is no “clean break” possible from the European Union.

      • Edward2
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:26 am | Permalink

        Make your mind up Martin
        One minute you tell us how little real influence the EU has over us the next you tell us the opposite.

      • Fred H
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:02 am | Permalink

        we remain constricted by the pot while subjugated to the EU.
        Freedom remains elusive – yet the pot could easily have been broken off and roots of recovery sprouted. Our gardeners haven’t got a clue and want us potbound forever.

      • NickC
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:49 am | Permalink

        Martin, Rubbish – of course a clean break from the EU is possible. The UK has never been an enthusiastic part of the anti-democratic Brussels club, and we already had some opt outs. You’ve said so yourself. It is not like, say, England and Scotland which combined its governments in 1603 (James 1/6), and already had much in common anyway. That really would be difficult to disentangle.

    • Lynn Atkinson
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

      +1

    • glen cullen
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:35 pm | Permalink

      Don’t think promise is the correct word

      The wording of the question on the ballot paper was clear and concise – In or Out…..it wasn’t a promise

  33. glen cullen
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 2:52 pm | Permalink

    An EU deal is getting closer as the UK backs down on fishing. A three year transition on EU fleets is not what I voted for (the guardian) – The conservative party will lose my vote at any future election

    • a-tracy
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:39 pm | Permalink

      The EU coastal communities have already had a four-year transitional period to get used to the changes. Where was this tabled? What did the UK get for this betrayal?

      The French are already shooting their motor industry in the foot with French language only passports for vehicles sold into the UK. We need new van manufacturers in the UK wanting to work with the British instead of this posturing.

    • Martin in Cardiff
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:01 pm | Permalink

      No actual government can deliver the utter fantasy that the lying Leave campaigns promised Leave voters.

      It could never exist in this universe.

      • NickC
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

        Martin, Most countries on the planet already have what you claim can never exist in this universe.

      • Edward2
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:01 pm | Permalink

        Presumably a democratic vote and its result can be ignored in your Marxist world.

      • Lynn Atkinson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:19 pm | Permalink

        It existed for 800 years before we embarked on the EU experiment, which we found not to our liking.

      • Mike Wilson
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:45 pm | Permalink

        We seemed to manage okay for hundreds of years before 1973

      • Sir Joe Soap
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:58 pm | Permalink

        Why not?
        It’s just Leave.

      • Peter Parsons
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 1:50 pm | Permalink

        Martin is right. Leavers promised multiple things, including:

        1, Preserving the integrity of the UK as it is currently constituted.
        2, No hard border in Ireland.
        3, The ability of the UK to strike it’s own trade deals.

        Delivering any two of these renders the third impossible.

        Johnson’s withdrawal agreement delivers on points 2 and 3, with it’s known consequences for Northern Ireland.

        May’s withdrawal agreement essentially delivered on points 1 and 2, as a consequence could not deliver 3, and was rejected.

        Delivering on 1 and 3 requires implementing a border in Ireland.

        In the end, those who have been advocating leaving all this time need to agree on which one of the three they are willing to sacrifice as the rest of us are sick to the back teeth of all the complaining from people who asked for the impossible and were then unhappy when it couldn’t be delivered.

        • Edward2
          Posted October 1, 2020 at 3:54 pm | Permalink

          Rubbish Peter.
          You set up a false set of rules.

          The UK can become an independent sovereign nation just like well over 100 other nations not in the EU
          There will be no hard border on the island of Ireland other than what is there now as both sides of the border will not have one.
          Unless the EU want to build themselves a wall.
          The UK will have the right to make it’s own trade deals and some are set up already just waiting to be signed in January 2021

          • Peter Parsons
            Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:56 pm | Permalink

            I suggest you read up on the WTO requirements on non-discrimination.

          • Edward2
            Posted October 2, 2020 at 9:21 am | Permalink

            There are difference is tariffs where there are agreements between nations.
            WTO accept this due to a general requirement to facilitate free trade.
            I suggest you try 30 years in businesses that import and export worldwide.

    • Ian@Barkham
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:21 pm | Permalink

      And that will probably also leave the ECJ as the master and imposer of the new Laws and rules.

      What can they be thinking of. A ‘Clean Break’ means just that and that was what was voted on

      • glen cullen
        Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:37 pm | Permalink

        Correct

    • Robert Mcdonald
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:56 pm | Permalink

      I think it is a very reasonable way forward. Surely we don’t want the European fisheries to face a cliff edge, I know our fisheries had such a challenge when Heath sacrificed it for … something or other. We are showing that we are acting as a friendly ex partner should, pity it is not being reciprocated.

  34. The Prangwizard
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:38 pm | Permalink

    Boris the bottler is backing down on fishing. Absolutely not acceptable. It doesn’t do to ‘trust’ him. Trouble is I dare say Sir John may think it reasonable.

    This won’t be the only surrender.

    No surprise.

    • James
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:55 pm | Permalink

      Language is all wrong- it’s about negotiation with our nearest neighbours

  35. Diane
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 3:52 pm | Permalink

    Two weeks to go. If hints & leaks in the press are a true indication of where we are & where we are heading then my past tolerance, positivity, support & goodwill towards this government is reaching a point of no return. Now a mooted Fisheries transition too – no more transitions thank you. Just more can kicking of which I think we have all had enough. Here’s another whose future vote will, no doubt & very sadly enable a deplorable Labour party to enter office.

    • NickC
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 5:38 pm | Permalink

      Indeed, Diane. We could have been out in 12 months, so the EU has already had their 3 year fishing transition on top.

    • No Longer Anonymous
      Posted September 30, 2020 at 7:14 pm | Permalink

      Do you HONESTLY think Labour could be any worse ?

      • Fred H
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 2:14 pm | Permalink

        With the Tories it is like Russian roulette with 3 chambers loaded, with LABOUR it might be 4 chambers loaded.

        In each case death is a horrible gamble.

  36. Shane
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 4:38 pm | Permalink

    John- the Internal Market Bill is an abrogation of a treaty that was already agreed and signed only less than a year ago. It is not as if Britain and particularly the English have not broken laws before in this regard, there are other examples, but in this modern age to think you could get away with it and that the EU27 would sit back and be bamboozled? even as a negotiation tactic it is much too simple to accept. People even EU people are not that stupid- and so your government has put us in a position of great disadvantage with no trust from our neighbours on this side of the Atlantic but also on the other. What we’re talking about here is ERG Boris Dom and English nationalism gone mad- and we shouldn’t be surprised there are plenty of others during the course of time have gone the same way- so question will there be a way back? yes but it will take time- and in the meantime we’ll have to spend a few decades first scratching around out the back trying to find ourselves again- but in saying this all are agreed everything has changed for England – the Empire has gone, the EU has gone and soon the UK will be no more- am afraid

    • beresford
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:01 am | Permalink

      …..and your alternative is that we allow a foreign power to partition the United Kingdom?

  37. bill brown
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 6:22 pm | Permalink

    Edward 2

    As already said you really do not get it do you about international law?

    • Edward2
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:27 am | Permalink

      You have posted in the wrong place again bill
      Possibly in breach of some international law.

    • a-tracy
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:50 am | Permalink

      No one ‘gets it’ about International Law, including yourself I’d guess unless you’re an International Lawyer working in the EU? Are you bill brown?

  38. Dougg
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:25 pm | Permalink

    I feel your pain Diane although I am on the other side- but we were horribly lied to

    • NickC
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:53 am | Permalink

      Dougg, There were no lies on the Leave side – we were just advised that we could be as independent of the EU as say New Zealand. Or Albania, as Remain put it. It’s not really so difficult to understand, is it?

  39. Original Chris
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:32 pm | Permalink

    I see you did not vote against the Coronavirus Act. Only 7 tory mps did so. Shameful. The “rebels” apparently bottled it again.

    As Laura Perrins tweeted (Conservative Woman website):

    “What a pointless bunch of useless cretins the Conservative MPs are. They should have voted down the tyrannical, pointless, authoritarian Coronavirus Act and removed Johnson from his position. But their jobs and pensions are secure. Cretins all of them”.

  40. No Longer Anonymous
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 8:37 pm | Permalink

    Please tell Boris Johnson that we are not “impatient” and nor are we simply “fed up”.

    We are shitting ourselves about the future and mourning the life that has been taken from us.

    He has utterly ruined our beautiful country based on dodgy stats.

    Please please please rid us of this awful man.

  41. Alan Paul Joyce
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    An excellent contribution to the debate on the Bill. I am intrigued as to your comment that ‘I am always being told by Ministers that they are strong on that’. It sounds very much like you do not believe a word they say.

    However, it’s getting towards that moment known to football managers as squeaky-bum time. We will soon learn whether the rhetoric on ‘taking back control of our laws, borders and money’ was just hot-air. And, of course, fishing. In this regard, it is truly dispiriting to note that, contrary to Ministers’ assertions that our fish are not on offer, the UK has just tabled a three-year transition period for EU fishermen to continue to plunder our stocks. If reports are to be believed.

    The EU does not really want to offer a free trade agreement except that it has its obscene £100 billion annual trade surplus with the UK to preserve. The EU is fond of talking about a level-playing field so as to avoid ‘dumping’. Yet, it is the worst culprit. Why has the UK not demanded that something be done about the dumping of German goods and cars on the UK – subsidised as they are by a structurally undervalued Euro that is too strong for Southern nations and too weak for Germany and other Northern states?

    Only two weeks to go until Boris’ deadline. I can see another concession coming.

    • margaret howard
      Posted October 1, 2020 at 7:08 am | Permalink

      Alan Paul Joyce

      “The EU does not really want to offer a free trade agreement except that it has its obscene £100 billion annual trade surplus with the UK to preserve.”

      Mostly to defeat the unions Mrs Thatcher destroyed many of our industries and turned us into a Service/Financial provider. The financial sector thrived but little can be exported in a service industry.

      Car industry, ship building etc were all destroyed and we relied on imports to supply our needs. Hence the £100b trade surplus.

      So whatever happens we will have to continue to import much of our essentials from outside the EU with none of the advantages membership gave us.

      And no doubt countries like Germany who have invested heavily in establishing subsidiaries in this country with thousands of jobs provided will leave and take their custom and jobs elsewhere.

      As the saying doesn’t go:

      “It’s a lose-lose situation”

      • Edward2
        Posted October 1, 2020 at 4:03 pm | Permalink

        The car industry isn’t destroyed.
        Turnover approx £90 billion a year and it manufactures 1.5 million cars and 85,000 commercial vehicles (2018)
        It employs hundreds of thousands of people in the UK.

        And it was millions of individual customers who went elsewhere to buy the products they preferred not Lady Thatcher.

  42. Alan Paul Joyce
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 9:24 pm | Permalink

    Dear Mr. Redwood,

    I seem to have posted two very similar messages in error. Would you kindly delete the first one you received from me and consider the second for moderation. Thank you.

  43. XYXY
    Posted September 30, 2020 at 11:00 pm | Permalink

    Well said JR!

    Good to hear that God-awful previous Parliament getting the slating it so richly deserves. And the rump of it that remains getting a dose of the same. They need to be called out repeatedly.

  44. Lindsay McDougall
    Posted October 1, 2020 at 1:34 am | Permalink

    It’s going to be interesting to see what the EU is going to do about supporting Airbus. Airbus has been hugely profitable in the past but the Airbus 380 super jumbo has not been a financial success because there are few routes on which is possible both to fill the plane and fly frequently. Furthermore, air travel has been badly hit by COVID-19 and that can’t be helping sales of new aircraft, many existing aircraft having been mothballed.

    The French and German governments each have a 20% share in Airbus. So the question arises: if Airbus starts to make losses, will the EU constrain France and Germany not to bail it out?

  45. Posted October 1, 2020 at 6:35 am | Permalink

    Well done Karin Smyth well said indeed
    Such a shame that there are still so many in this Parliament that still do not want our people to be free .it is simple only if more MPs except that it is the wish of the British people, it is there duty to carry out our wish to be sovereign, just as we were before thank you.
    We Want, only what was ours before we went in to the EU.
    I should have thought our wishes could not be ignored in International Law
    WTO ASAP please MPs

  46. Iain Gill
    Posted October 1, 2020 at 8:14 am | Permalink

    I see HM Revenue & Customs has just posted a vacancy for “Lead Programme Architect (EU Exit Programme)”…

    er a bit late dont you think? given how long ago the referendum was.

    No doubt even though there are lots of good people out of work they wont find anyone prepared to take it for the low salary they will be offering, and they will continue to flood their project with people from the big consultancies on massive day rates that bring lots of overheads and BS with them.

    The job spec itself reveals how much trouble they are in.

    Sad really.

  47. ChrisS
    Posted October 1, 2020 at 9:11 am | Permalink

    A well-crafted contribution and one I can agree with 100%

  48. Fred H
    Posted October 1, 2020 at 10:19 am | Permalink

    our ‘friends’ acrosss The Channel-

    The EU has begun legal proceedings against the UK after it refused to ditch plans to override sections of its Brexit divorce deal.
    An EU request for the government to remove sections of the Internal Market Bill passed by MPs on Wednesday. The “letter of formal notice” could eventually lead to a court case against the government at the EU’s top court.
    The UK said it would respond “in due course”.
    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the UK would have until the end of November to respond to the EU’s concerns over the draft legislation.
    However, the EU will continue talks over a post-Brexit trade deal in Brussels. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has said both sides should “move on” if a deal was not reached by mid-October.

  • 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