11pm 29th March 2019

The date of our departure from the EU is determined by the EU Treaty. Under Article 50 we gave notice. We leave at any time when there is Agreement between the UK and the rest of the EU, or at the  two years point if there is no agreement.

It now looks clear that the EU has no wish to reach a mutually beneficial Agreement to get us out of the EU before March 2019. They are still refusing to discuss the future relationship and trade arrangements which the UK thinks it is in our mutual interest to discuss.

The question now comes up for debate in Parliament about when the UK needs to bring into full effect the EU Withdrawal Bill to ensure legal continuity and certainty following our departure. The government is therefore moving an amendment to make the time and date 11pm on 29th March 2019.

This should not be contentious. It is the date and time we will cease to be a member state under the Treaty and Article 50 procedure. The reason it also needs to be written into the Withdrawal Bill is that we need to bring in its provisions at the same time as we cease to belong to the EU in international law. Domestic law has to take over. It is also the likely earliest time when there could be an Agreement.

So why is it a matter of grave concern to some MPs that the government wishes to ensure this legal continuity? For the rest of the Bill they are desperate to ensure anything is debated in Bill Committee and does go through full legislative scrutiny, yet they don’t want to do the same for the important matter of when we leave.

The reason seems to be that they think we might get into the position where we are very close to an Agreement by 29 March 2019 but would somehow be thwarted in concluding shortly afterwards if we had in the meantime left the EU. It is difficult to see why this should occur. We have 16 months prior to departure to try to reach an Agreement. That Agreement could include an implementation period to follow exit if it required changes that are difficult to put in place quickly. The government has already said there will be additional legislation for any Agreement to be implemented in the UK.

I cannot see having a deadline 16 months ahead makes it more difficult to conclude an Agreement. If the EU does want a mutually beneficial Agreement there is plenty of time to get one. If the EU does not really want one or intends to try to squeeze more and more concessions out of the UK, an extension of a week or two after March 2019 is not going to suddenly provide a suitable Agreement after months of failure.

When Parliament legislated to send the Article 50 letter it legislated for us to leave in March 2019. The main reason we want that on the face of the Withdrawal Bill is to provide certainty and continuity of law given it now seems inevitable we will not be leaving by agreement any earlier.

On Tuesday the crucial Clause 1 which repeals the 1972 Act and therefore takes us out of the EU according to UK law passed by 318 to 68. The official Labour party abstained, as they realised voting against would be to vote against Brexit itself. The rest of the Bill is about creating legal certainty by carry over of EU laws.



  1. Fedupsoutherner
    November 16, 2017

    29th March 2019? Bring it on!! The only fly in the ointment is that Sturgeon has just made our celebratory tipple more expensive!!

    1. DaveM
      November 16, 2017

      Indeed – another kick in the face for less well-off families and people who have little to look forward to apart from a fag and a pint. Typical champagne socialist nannying. At least the booze-selling shops in Carlisle and Newcastle will make a bit of extra cash.

      1. turboterrier
        November 16, 2017

        @ DaveM

        At least the booze-selling shops in Carlisle and Newcastle will make a bit of extra cash.

        Will not be good for the environment as the fleet of white vans start their convoys to and fro. Will make the old booze cruise from the south across to France seem like a weekly stroll in the park. In Sussex pensioners use to travel across as foot soldiers with their B& Q fold up sack barrow for a couple of pounds on the special day offers whilst the better off went in their white vans. What was better, a day out with friends and earn a few bob on the side and not having to sit indoors with the heating on.

        The canny Scots will soon turn it into a real earner as it will beat real working for those who spend their lives on the social ironically known up here as being on the brew.

        1. Hope
          November 16, 2017

          Peter Lilley MP thinks not to negotiate in tandem is illegal as the Treaty requires this to be done. Is this correct!? If so why has Davis entertained this and not pointed out it is legal requirement to discuss both simultaneously?

          Of the 15 Tory MPs doing Barniers bidding, 9 are from leave constituencies. If we. Had a right to recall where the party could replace with another person from the same party then these would be gone. Right to recall change required. Grieve, Clarke, Soubry and Morgan defying the will of the electorate, the electorate needs a right of response. Bernard Jenkins quite correct in his comments, Soubry showing how unfit for office she is. May should have withdrawn the whip from Clarke and sacked Odonis.

        2. The Prangwizard
          November 16, 2017

          If only! There will be a campaign by those who want to control alcohol as they do cigarettes that prices in England are too cheap. Brewers and distillers will probably raise prices anyway – any excuse will do.

      2. Bob
        November 16, 2017

        “At least the booze-selling shops in Carlisle and Newcastle will make a bit of extra cash.”

        Yes, a flourishing trade could develop in home deliveries.

        1. BOF
          November 16, 2017

          I am sure Amazon will get in on the act with drones!

      3. a-tracy
        November 16, 2017

        Higher booze prices mean higher tax collection, it won’t be long before England follows.

      4. DiscoveredJoys
        November 16, 2017

        Unless Scottish stores can get away with “Buy one, get three free”?

        1. treacle
          November 17, 2017

          They won’t. Special offers for buying more than one bottle of alcohol are illegal in Scotland. Shops are not allowed to offer discounts for buying more than one bottle, buy one get one free, or anything of that sort.

    2. APL
      November 16, 2017

      Fedupsoutherner: “The only fly in the ointment is that Sturgeon has just made our celebratory tipple more expensive!!”

      Only in Scotland.

      1. JoolsB
        November 16, 2017

        “Fedupsoutherner: “The only fly in the ointment is that Sturgeon has just made our celebratory tipple more expensive!!”

        Only in Scotland.”

        If only. You just wait. Now Scotland have done it, it won’t be long before it is introduced in England by that other nannying Government, the UK Government run by May and Hammond. Of course the Scots MPs will have their say, might even swing the vote, just as they did with extended Sunday trading in England and the introduction of tuition fees and our host’s self serving colleagues won’t utter one word of protest when that happens – wait and see!!!

      2. The PrangWizard
        November 16, 2017

        Scotland has been a try-out for legislative issues for decades. Expect it to happen in England before long. There is no doubt there will have been behind the scenes collusion.

      3. stred
        November 16, 2017

        According to ITV news last night, the Nannies victory in Scotland could become the basis for spoiling our cheering up juice in England and Wales too. Hopefully, Westminster MPs will see to it that the rest of us can still get a bottle at a reasonable price and keep little Jimmy’s do-gooders on her side of Hadrians Wall.

        The local ITV news also covered the imprisonment of Mrs Ratcliffe and repeated the lie that Boris said she was training journalists -in Iran. The last two words were invented by journalists and are read by the Iranians who arrested her. And they accuse Boris of making things worse!

      4. rose
        November 16, 2017

        Fedupsoutherner is in Scotland.

        1. fedupsoutherner
          November 17, 2017

          Rose. Thanks for noticing that I live in Scotland!!

      5. Fedupsoutherner
        November 16, 2017

        APL. How long before wales and Ireland follow suit?? They are already following in earnest. Will England follow too?

    3. turboterrier
      November 16, 2017

      @ FOS

      Typical Scottish Government decision come up with a solution but not address the underlying problem. Empress Nick has learned three fifths of nothing of their years in power. Totally second rate as is the majority of their performances.

    4. Lifelogic
      November 16, 2017

      More half baked economic lunacy of price controls in scotland to follow in NI and Wales it seems. Surely if the shops just keep the extra revenue they will just offer you a better deal on perhaps the mixers or the snacks. Bottle of cheap gin/whisky = 26 units so say £13.00 (at 50p a unit) with free tonic, soda or pork scratchings perhaps?

      Or perhaps just brew your own beer, very easy indeed circa 10p per unit of alcohol and rather better than the over sweet stuff you can buy. More “environmental” too as you can re-use all the bottles.

      Half witted economic lunacy is everywhere especially at nos 10 and 11. Wage controls, HS2, biofuels, price controls, self employment controls, endless red tape, green crap grants for renewable nonsense, IHT, CGT, Income tax and SDLT at absurdly high rates, student loans to study complete nonsense at “universities”, the unworkable monopoly NHS …….

      1. Mark B
        November 17, 2017


        These idiots have forgotten the rules of supply and demand. If you seek to cut off the supply by legitimate means, even slowly, there are those who will be able to source cheaper items elsewhere and make a handsome profit from the difference. Have they not learned anything from history and American prohibition ?

  2. Lifelogic
    November 16, 2017

    As you say:-

    If the EU does not really want one or intends to try to squeeze more and more concessions out of the UK, an extension of a week or two after March 2019 is not going to suddenly provide a suitable Agreement after months of failure.

    Surely even the daft Brexit, anti-democratic, Mutineers are capable of following this logic?

    1. Tasman
      November 16, 2017

      It’s the logic of anyone who has never been involved in tough negotiations. They always go up to the last minute, and denying the flexibility to take a bit more time is simply stubborn and stupid

      1. Edward2
        November 17, 2017

        With no last minute defined there is no end.

    2. Bob
      November 16, 2017

      Lets not kid ourselves, the mutineers are trying to throw a spanner in the works for one reason only, to thwart Brexit. These people despite their protestations to the contrary are working for the opposition.

      For future elections the Tories should to allow local branches to select their candidates.

    3. rose
      November 16, 2017

      Yes, they are, but they wish to delay by any and every means possible, to keep us in.

    4. Man of Kent
      November 16, 2017

      The mutineers of course know what they are doing –delay-delay – delay.
      My MP is not a mutineer but were she one then I would be lobbying hard to have her de-selected.
      There are reports that in mutineer constituencies the grass roots are grumbling .
      It would only take one de-selection ‘pour encourager les autres ‘ .
      We would all have our favourites for the first.

    5. Denis Cooper
      November 16, 2017

      If there are two willing and co-operative parties who belatedly find that it is taking longer than expected to sort out various legal/technical/practical difficulties then there can be a good case for them agreeing to extend the negotiating period.

      And that could have applied in this case if the EU was being reasonable, but it is not; as James Dyson told Andrew Marr:


      the EU is being totally unreasonable.

      We have the UK eager to start negotiations on the important issue of trade, while the EU flatly refuses to do that until they think they have maximised the money they have extorted from us. In fact it seems they won’t even start discussions on a customs co-operation agreement.

      But for some reason which I cannot fathom David Davis is content to see the UK blamed for the negotiations getting bogged down, when from the start the blame has always lain entirely with the EU.

    6. Lifelogic
      November 16, 2017

      Theresa May keep talking about people paying their “fair amount” of tax. What on earth has “fairness” go to do with it dear? You pay what is legally due under threat of prison. There is nothing fair about it at all.

      What is fair about paying say £1 million PA tax and getting almost nothing of any real value back for it? Then having another 40% of assets taken off you on death.

      The job of government is to set the tax laws as is best for the economy. Do not pretend it is “fair” dear you just sound like a silly child. What is fair about Hammond taxing profits that had not even been made? What is fair about taxing someone’s estate massively (as he died unexpectedly early) before passing his assets on to his children?

      What is fair about people being taxed to the hilt so government can piss the money away on the EU, HS2, Biofuels, incompetent defence procurement, augmenting the feckless, windfarms, PV, and Hinkley C and the war on the lie?

      1. Mark B
        November 17, 2017

        If they want to see fairness in the tax system then they should start by putting VAT on booze in the Palace of Westminster and taxing Ministers for ‘Company / Taxpayer Chauffeur’ driven cars.

    7. NickC
      November 16, 2017

      Lifelogic, I’m not convinced that the Remains can follow such basic logic. After all our own government is timidly pleading for is a zero-tariff free-trade agreement with the EU. Which the Remains say we desperately need. But that deal is no different to a WTO deal where we (UK/EU) agree zero tariffs and register it with the WTO as an RTA.

  3. Duncan
    November 16, 2017

    Personally, the economy is a side issue. By a considerable margin the most important issues at stake are that ECJ jurisdiction is removed entirely from the shores of the UK, the supremacy of British parliamentary rule is reinstated and the absolute supremacy of British law once again reigns within our controlled borders. It is a legal state of affairs enjoyed by hundreds of nations around the globe.

    Extinguish the presence of the ECJ and the EU from our lands. They are political, poisonous, pernicious and offensive to a supposed sovereign nation.

    Disinfect the British legal system of all EU law, tone and influence.

    I love Europe, its people and its diverse cultures. I travel to Europe all the time but I despise the EU and all it stands for.

    Europe is not the EU

    Thanks John for keeping us informed.

    1. DaveM
      November 16, 2017

      Echo that 100%.

      1. Hope
        November 16, 2017

        Agree. Carney at it again today. I am coming to the view it is with government connivance to condition our minds for a bad deal. Most leaders would have sacked him. He has got all his predictions and forecasts wrong yet is being very political.

      2. Chris
        November 16, 2017

        …and I too, Duncan.

    2. turboterrier
      November 16, 2017

      @ Duncan

      Very well said

    3. Peter Wood
      November 16, 2017

      Quite right! It seems many are confusing the two issues; sovereignty and trade. Sovereignty is more important than trade, accept that and confirm the departure date now, then all who trade now where the goal posts are. Make WTO terms the default trading arrangement (there is no intention by the EU bureaucracy to accept a FTA), fund and plan for it with the intention to improve if possible.

      1. Peter Wood
        November 16, 2017


      2. DiscoveredJoys
        November 16, 2017

        Even if ‘the EU’ create an acceptable trade agreement I suspect that there are too many rEU countries who will be only too willing to vote against it. The Eurocrats are in the strange position of being too powerful and too ineffective at the same time. A quantum superstate where you can’t tell if it is alive or dead.

      3. Leslie Singleton
        November 16, 2017

        Dear Peter–Daniel Hannan has recently written (I have seen no contradiction) that Exports to the rEU are 12.6 % of GDP and that Brexit is estimated to lose only 2% of that. Perhaps I didn’t understand but that is a good working definition of zero so, as asked before, what is all the fuss about, and that’s without even considering the much more important Sovereignty?

      4. Rien Huizer
        November 17, 2017

        Define sovereignty..In the modern world that term only applies to the US. No other country can wage war without anyone’s consent or support.

        1. NickC
          November 17, 2017

          Rein, Why? Can’t you look it up yourself? Oxford dictionary: “Supreme power or authority; the authority of a state to govern itself”.

          The next sequence in this well worn argument is when you say that signing any treaty limits the authority of a state. Any concession to that view means you can say: “so it’s not just the EU treaties!” Any disagreement with that, means you can counter by saying “then the EU treaties don’t limit UK sovereignty either” Tra-la, you win!!!

          Except you don’t, because EU treaties are not normal treaties. Our signing up to the EU treaties transfers law making power from the UK to the EU. In contrast, for a normal treaty, such as the dual taxation Russia/UK treaty, neither side can change the fixed agreement and law making powers are not transferred.

          Sovereignty really, really matters. Otherwise the EU wouldn’t be acquiring it as fast as it can.

    4. Chris S
      November 16, 2017

      Well Done Duncan.

      This post details my own thoughts too a T.


    5. Peter Miller
      November 16, 2017

      However, if the 15(?) Tory rebels, flaunting their monstrous egos, allow Jeremy Corbyn to get in, then being in the EU and under ECJ jurisdictian would at least stop some of his loonier policies.

      Can we not deselect these Tory rebels, especially as most ‘represent’ Brexit voting communities?

      I emigrated under the last loony left Labour government, I don’t really relish doing that again.

    6. Linda Jones
      November 16, 2017

      Well said, Duncan.

    7. David Price
      November 16, 2017


      JR made the point very succinctly in the house that today ministers must do what the EU tells them but once we are out they will only be permitted to do what Parliament permits them and they will have no EU to hide behind.

    8. matthu
      November 16, 2017

      “Disinfect the British legal system of all EU law, tone and influence. ”

      I think that also means “No” to Gove’s idea of a super-governmental green watchdog which would very soon expand to encroach on health and safety and all the rest just the same way that the EU did.

      I hope Gove gives up on that idea pretty smartly.

    9. Edward2
      November 16, 2017

      Excellent post Duncan
      Well said.

  4. Tasman
    November 16, 2017

    Did you not even listen to the debate? It is perfectly obvious why fixing the date is stupid. It ties the government’s hands in its negotiating strategy. It throws away the flexibility (to take a bit longer) that any negotiatior needs.

    1. Duncan
      November 16, 2017

      There’s no need for flexibility. The EU doesn’t want a deal and aren’t a serious negotiating partner. They are allowing the passage of time to dilute our resolve and commitment to leaving. Fixing a date to leave the EU in effect sets the clock ticking and injects urgency into a moribund situation

      Leave was victorious following the EU-Ref vote. The UK is leaving the EU in its entirety to return to a normal state of affairs enjoyed by hundreds of similar nations around the globe. I believe they call it INDEPENDENCE.

      It is the EU that is an anomaly in today’s democratic age. A political device to suck the life and energy from those democratic nations who choose to join it. Almost a protectionist racket with Russia being used to cajole and incite fear in anyone daring to express signs of EU discontent

      An utterly vile political construct

      1. Denis Cooper
        November 16, 2017

        The EU is taking the mickey out of us, but some MPs do not object to that because they on the EU’s side not ours.

      2. bigneil
        November 16, 2017

        “They are allowing the passage of time” – – at £55 million a day from us- -they aren’t in a rush.

      3. Martyn G
        November 16, 2017

        Duncan, you say “….a protectionist racket with Russia being used to cajole and incite fear in anyone daring to express signs of EU discontent”.
        Spot on, I think. Remember, always remember that when Napoleon was brought to an impotent halt at the English channel, he turned and attacked Russia. And of course so did Hitler after the Battle of Britain and we all know what happened on both of those occasions. Things of moved since then and although it is inconceivable that overtly war-like actions be taken by the EU, there is more than one way of skinning a cat….

      4. margaret howard
        November 16, 2017

        Welcome to American rule.

        We are already following them into illegal wars and invasions starting with Iraq that have set the Middle East on fire.

        Now they will swamp us with their chlorine washed chickens and their genetically modified crops. Without EU laws to protect us we are powerless to resist them.

        Our EU membership will soon be seen as having been our golden age after being rescued from being the ‘sick man of Europe’ fifty years ago.

        1. Edward2
          November 17, 2017

          Didn’t protect us from the horsemeat fraud and infected eggs.

        2. NickC
          November 17, 2017

          Margaret Howard, We actually are being ruled by the EU from Brussels. Which you appear to welcome. However powerful the USA is, Washington does not force its laws onto the UK statute book.

          We followed the US into what you claim were “illegal wars and invasions” whilst being in the EU. And the person most responsible for that was our EU loving PM, Tony Blair.

          The infamous “chlorine washed chickens” issue is a Remain propaganda red-herring. The Americans do not wash their freshly slaughtered chickens in “chlorine”. They put chlorine into the washing water, at about the same strength as we use in swimming pools for the same reason: to reduce infections.

      5. getahead
        November 16, 2017

        “Almost” a protectionist racket, Duncan?

    2. eeyore
      November 16, 2017

      Tasman – Depend on it, nothing concentrates the other party’s mind like the knowledge you’ll get up and go. The EU is being paid £350m a week to sit and chat about the future. Hardly surprising that it feels no urgency to end the discussion.

    3. Roy Grainger
      November 16, 2017

      What you need to explain to make your interpretation credible is how the provision for a 2 year period in A50 before leaving can simply be ignored to take “a bit” more time ? And if it can be ignored to take a bit more time then why not ignore it to take 10 more years, or 50 ? What’s the difference ?

      No you (and John actually) have got it wrong – you need to delete the word “bit” in your post. The people agitating against this date don’t want us to leave the EU at all, their plan is to get to the last minute, vote against any deal on offer, then vote to extend negotiations for longer and longer, having a specific leaving date in the bill complicates this approach. For sure they want the “bit more time” to push the leaving beyond the date of the next general election.

      1. Brian Tomkinson
        November 16, 2017

        I agree.

      2. Leslie Singleton
        November 16, 2017

        Dear Roy–Couldn’t agree more that the Remainiacs look with hope, or at least nothing to lose, as they would say it, from delaying till the next Election, by which time we could be anywhere, with them being able to say by then that another Referendum is not a Second but a completely New One.

    4. Caterpillar
      November 16, 2017


      I think Dr Redwood’s post is sound. Continuity must be put in place. There is time if the EU negotiators get on with it. The date reduces the chance of holdup. The EU does not want to be flexible, it did not use the opportunity to undertake preliminary discussions prior to triggering Article 50.

    5. Fedupsoutherner
      November 16, 2017

      Tasman, how long is a piece of string? With a date to work to, it focusses the mind!!

    6. Nig l
      November 16, 2017

      Have you done any serious negotiating? With no date, there is every chance that someone will claim we just need a little more time, then a little more time and this continues in extremis being used as an excuse not to close the negotiations out and they meander on for ever. The so called mutineers, Soubry again and the usual suspects are spinning this as helping our chances whereas it is their latest ruse to thwart the process.

      The EU has already shown that it is trying to extend the negotiations as long as possible, having no firm date just plays into their hands as well.

    7. MickN
      November 16, 2017

      ……and every extra month is an extra billion of OUR money into the EU coffers. Churchill defeated Europe in less time than we are taking to leave the EU. I am glad he was there for us in the 1940s and not the snowflake “can’t do” generation that we have reared. The latest rubbish on the Brexit Bashing Corporation this morning is that we must employ more border guards to cope with the increase of guns and drugs that will be smuggled into the UK after Brexit. Absolutely unbelievable !

      1. bigneil
        November 16, 2017

        We need more Border guards anyway. A Police (real) tv program shows one driver being pulled up and checked – to be eventually realised as an illegal, who had already been deported back to Afghanistan TWICE – -and was back here, driving, no license, no insurance etc. Entered THREE times illegally . . .WHAT border guards??

    8. turboterrier
      November 16, 2017

      @ Tasman

      Reading your comment one has the perception that you have never sold anything in your life in the field of contracts and time scales

    9. Know-Dice
      November 16, 2017

      Don’t forget to extend the “negotiations” or to even have an “implementation” period requires the agreement of ALL 27 EU member countries – is that going to happen?

    10. zorro
      November 16, 2017

      A bit longer eh? More like never from your viewpoint! That is why we need certainty because some of our fellow citizens will use any means to undermine the will of the British people.


    11. Original Richard
      November 16, 2017

      Firstly, the leaving date is defined by an EU Treaty/EU law and the EU simply cannot be trusted. It will break its own laws when it wants. As Mr. Juncker said back in May 2011:

      “When it becomes serious you have to lie”

      So we need the leaving date to be enshrined in UK law.

      Secondly it is perfectly obvious from current “negotiations” that the EU and its UK supporters do not want us to leave the EU. Not because they like us but because :

      – We pay £10bn/year net to their budget and any extension of the leaving date will mean putting more money into their coffers.

      – They take advantage of us to export £100bn/year more in goods than we export to them.

      – They take advantage of our taxpayers who provide non-contributory health and welfare benefits to all EU citizens which leads to massive immigration (still continuing “despite Brexit”) causing shortages of housing, schools, hospitals, infrastructure and damaging our social cohesion and environment and increasing our national debt.

      – They can continue to have access to our fishing grounds.

      – They can continue to control us through their laws and the ECJ, thus preventing us from becoming a free country.

    12. Dan H.
      November 16, 2017

      The EU consists mostly of a huge bureaucracy, whose main claim to fame is being the out and out world champions of kicking cans down the road. They don’t solve problems, they postpone them and carry on postponing them until the problem either dies of old age or goes away out of boredom.

      At the moment this mighty bureaucracy is facing a problem of the most terrible sorts a bureaucracy can ever face: when Britain ceases paying into their coffers, they won’t have enough income to pay all their bureaucrats the frankly stupendous salaries that said worthies have become accustomed to. This is a terrible thing, so the EU bureaucracy is doing what it does best: postpone the problem.

      Setting an end date to our membership is thus a master stroke; it gives the EU bureaucracy a deadline to sort their ideas out by. If there isn’t the deadline, then the EU will continue burbling on, postponing the inevitable, never reaching an agreement. The enforced deadline tactic works wonders on this sort of negotiation, especially if you start setting up all the measures for the worst case scenario.

      In our position, we ought to be getting ready for a WTO trading situation where no low-tariff trading deal is done with the EU. We also ought to be setting out our stall to act as a completely legal and above-board local tax sanctuary for hard-pressed EU companies that don’t like EU tax rates. This then gives the EU two things to worry about: we are prepared for the worst, and we’re getting set to poach even more of their tax revenue.

      1. Mark B
        November 17, 2017

        The deadline was already enshrined in UK law via the Treaty of Lisbon in Art.50. A maximum of 2 years !

    13. NickC
      November 16, 2017

      Tasman, What needs to be sorted (restoration of our fishing rights, etc, etc) can be done by Christmas 2017. As an independent nation we need only tell the EU out of courtesy. Then we use the next 15 months implementing the systems here (border controls, fishery protection, etc).

      We don’t need to negotiate a new trade deal with the EU. The existing WTO deal (used by us and the rest of the world now) is the best for us. And already exists. So no negotiation necessary. We don’t need anything like 16 months for that.

    14. getahead
      November 16, 2017

      Do pay attention Tasman. It has been pointed out already that the remaining 16 months is more than enough time to reach an agreement. If indeed both sides wish to come to an agreement which seems at the present time, unlikely.

  5. Mark B
    November 16, 2017

    Good morning

    The legal certainty is already enshrined in law TWICE over. Once in the Treaty of Lisbon (Art.50) and again in the judgement in the Supreme Court concerning whether or not the PM or parliament has the authority to envoke Art.50. So the only reason I can see for putting it into law is just for party political reasons and no other.

    As Jacob Rees-Mogg has quite rightly pointed out, if we have a transitional period in which the the EU through the ECJ still has power over our parliament and nation, then we have not left the EU. It is far better therefore for the UK to seek an extension of our membership as we would still be at the table. The current proposals are, in my opinion, far worse. We would still be shackled to the EU, paying ever larger sums in contributions with no monies back in the form of a rebate, having to obey their egregious laws and regulations, with no opportunity to do our own trade deals etc. Only a fool would sign up to this ! But in Westminster and Whitehall there seems an endless supply of such persons.

    Disgusting !

    1. CharlesV
      November 16, 2017

      Spot on Mark B, this is just a political stunt. The time for this kind of nonsense should have passed by now. It reflects badly on our host’s wing of the party that these games are still being played.

    2. Denis Cooper
      November 16, 2017

      As the essence of a transition is that it is a change from one state or condition to another state or condition, the suggested idea of a “standstill” or “status quo” transition where everything stays the same is complete nonsense.

    3. Timaction
      November 16, 2017

      Indeed there is an endless supply of people in Government and its civil service unable to grasp the simplest tasks and deliver. We still see the Tories dithering after seven and a half years to get a grip on immigration, and no grip whatsoever on he million plus illegals, our insecure borders, legislation to prevent abuse under Yuman Rights Laws (one in on the back of a lorry illegally, the whole family entitled to come as well!), health tourism or matching supply of public services to demand due to their own failures in the above.
      Young English people on Housing waiting lists have a right to know why anyone chipping up here takes precedence over themselves? Pc madness.
      Just get on with it. The Toreies wonder why they’re loosing the young people vote!
      Is the Home Secretary ever held to account by private sector competent people, or her immigration Minister? Not Committees made up of unqualified, part time MP’s?

    4. getahead
      November 16, 2017

      Well said, Mark.

  6. alte fritz
    November 16, 2017

    Lord Kerr recently proposed that a notice given under Article 50 is revocable, a proposition rejected by the the Claimants in the Gina Miller case. Again, Remainers have now switched their position. It seems to me elementary that our position is stronger if we are prepared to walk away if no satisfactory deal is available.

    1. Roy Grainger
      November 16, 2017

      Correct. During the Miller case the judges made it clear that although they had been asked by both sides to assume A50 was not revocable they (the judges themselves) were not ruling on that point. You can be pretty sure that if they WERE asked to rule on that (as all these Remainer manoeuvrings are intended to bring about) then they would find it can be revoked if parliament votes to do it. Barnier/Tusk have already done a bit of preparation for this endgame by announcing from the EU side that it can be revoked. This is what the Tory rebels want.

  7. hans chr iversen
    November 16, 2017


    your postulations that no deal will be made with the Eu is just another one of your nonsense clauses for which you have no proof as usual.

    Which is like the BoE giving up the debt to the government, that the economy will thrive after Brexit and that no deal through WTO is a good deal.

    Just a load of nonsense unsubstantiated and divorced from facts.

    1. Bob
      November 16, 2017

      @hans chr iversen – Gibberish!

    2. DiscoveredJoys
      November 16, 2017

      Even if we strike a trade deal with the EU it still has to be ratified by national governments. My guess is that some countries will refuse to ratify the deal unless their domestic desires are fulfilled, such as issues over the border between Ireland and the UK, the ownership of Gibraltar, agricultural and people exports from Poland, and French domestic politics.

      Far better, in my view, to plan for WTO trading and let the rEU sort out its own offer of a trade deal. It will probably take years to put one together.

    3. ian wragg
      November 16, 2017

      Thanks for the Brussels perspective again. A date to leave will concentrate the minds of Brussels. The rebels are traitors trying to keep us in the EU.
      Sovereignty not trade is the important point.
      It’s up to us the British people to rise to the challenge.

    4. Linda Jones
      November 16, 2017

      Perhaps you should do a little research of your own, Mr Chriversen. Read and listen to ALL media and not just the Grauniad and its ilk. You are talking our country down – well, you would, wouldn’t you?
      But we believe in our country and our future is bright!

    5. NickC
      November 16, 2017

      Hans, It seems very odd for you to claim that the WTO deal is “nonsense unsubstantiated and divorced from facts”. Remains seem very frightened of the WTO for reasons you don’t justify.

      The UK, and the other European countries, and most of the rest of the world, already trade by the “WTO deal” last time I checked the WTO website. And no, the few minor RTAs do not alter the fact that, for signatories, WTO rules rule.

      If there is a UK/EU zero-tariff deal it will be registered with the WTO and we will then continue to trade under WTO rules but at zero tariffs. As far as the UK is concerned now, the rest of Europe consists of “third countries” just as Brazil, USA, etc are.

  8. alan jutson
    November 16, 2017

    The simple reason the EU do not want to talk to us about trade or anything else other than money, is because money is the key element for them they simply want as much money as possible, no matter who it hurts.

    If we offer extension/transition periods, that creates further uncertainty for business for longer, and gives the EU more time to work on Companies who may want to re-locate from the UK to Europe.

    I am fed up with hearing about NO DEAL, as if everything will fall off a cliff because nothing is in place, when in reality it will be by default a WTO deal where the rules are already known.
    Thus many companies could and should have this option already on the books, especially if they already export to Countries outside the EU.

    Please stop calling it “NO DEAL” and call it a World Trade Organisation Deal/ Agreement as that is the default position if no other agreement is forthcoming.

    1. miami.mode
      November 16, 2017

      Good point at the end there, aj. So much in politics depends on a particular word or phrase and it should be continually stressed that trade will be an EU deal or a WTO deal.

  9. alan jutson
    November 16, 2017

    Absolutely right to put a date on the EU Withdrawal Bill, otherwise it could be any date in the future (or indeed never).

    1. Bob
      November 16, 2017

      ” (or indeed never)”

      Exactly the intention of the mutineers.

    2. Denis Cooper
      November 16, 2017

      Correct, that is the plan, and now we can see more clearly who supports it.

  10. Mick
    November 16, 2017

    Am I wrong but didn’t over 17 million vote to leave the dreaded eu, and that the withdrawal bill is a completely different issue in so much that it’s upto the MPs to vote on the bill if they want to have any laws after we leave at 11pm 29 March 2019, or don’t they want any laws and leave us lawless at 11.01pm March 29th 2019, or are they just trying to thwart the referendum result

    1. Brian Tomkinson
      November 16, 2017

      I think you’ve hit the nail on the head with your final clause.

    2. ian wragg
      November 16, 2017

      They are a bunch of preening tossers who are full of their own importance.
      They will get their just desserts at the next election as will the Tory Party if they don’t deliver.

  11. Cobwatch
    November 16, 2017

    If this amendment is defeated Brexit will be lost…and May will fall.

  12. Peter
    November 16, 2017

    Can this government deliver Brexit or will it be thwarted?

    Interesting times.

  13. Oggy
    November 16, 2017

    Very clearly put Dr Redwood.
    It is a simple fact that those who are campaigning against setting our leaving date in law, such as the MP’s for Broxtowe and Rushcliffe, will vote against it because they don’t want to leave the EU at all, it has nothing to do with the UK finding itself being fettered in negotiations.
    Last week Mrs May said she wouldn’t tolerate descent by her MP’s trying to delay or thwart Brexit so what is she going to do about it ?

    1. Oggy
      November 17, 2017

      “Last week Mrs May said she wouldn’t tolerate descent by her MP’s trying to delay or thwart Brexit so what is she going to do about it ?” – give in to them it seems and remove the amendment !

  14. Rob Jump
    November 16, 2017

    The EU doesn’t want an agreement so why wait 16 months paying huge amounts to people that give every sign of hating us. Sort the issues with border controls and whatever else needs doing as quickly as possible. Let Brussels see us doing that, make sure every paper and news broadcast reports it. They will come back begging then we should just leave anyway. Why are we kow towing to these people, who the hell do they think they are?

  15. TL
    November 16, 2017


    I think I’m going to go away on holiday that weekend!

    I really can’t cope with the thought of catching a single second of BBC programming that weekend.

  16. am
    November 16, 2017

    Bring on the date without transition.

    The objection is that it ties the hands for the gov in negotiation. This from those who have been since vote leave trying to block, delay and also tie the governments hand in negotiations is just a bit rich and a tell all evasion.

  17. Chris S
    November 16, 2017

    Isn’t it curious that diehard Remainers continue to rabbit on about democracy and the right for voters to change their minds ?

    The referendum was won by more than 1m votes but in our country, a general election is the key democratic tool used to establish the make up and direction of government. Indeed, even the unelected Lords normally follows a convention that it does not thwart legislation based on a Government’s general election manifesto.

    I think that Remainers are ignoring the inconvenient truth that there was a general election only five months ago and it was held after it was made crystal clear that the Conservative version of Brexit would result in us being outside both the single market and the EU’s present customs union.

    Consider the outcome of the 2017 general election in relation to Brexit :

    85% of those that votes, voted for parties campaigning on a Leave ticket ( Labour, UKIP, DUP and the Conservatives).

    Only the Lib Dems and SNP campaigned for Remain and/or a second referendum. Both of those parties lost support.

    Crucially, the 85% who voted for parties with a firm Leave manifesto represent an absolute majority of those entitled to vote. ( in fact more than 60% of those entitled to vote, chose to vote for those four parties then campaigning for Leave).

    So how can the Remainers possibly continue to argue that there is no democratic mandate to continue with the Government’s proposed version of Brexit and that a second referendum is necessary ?

  18. Bert Young
    November 16, 2017

    The EU are in a mess and they see a huge contribution from us as the only way they will be able to steer any sort of a stable course in the short term . We would be stupid to give in to their 2 week threat and we must not indicate any sort of compromise ; if we do Barnier will see this as a sign of weakness .

    The Conservatives have to show a solid front on the precise leaving date and , some how or another , bring the likes of Soubry , Morgan , Grieve and co to respect the country’s will . I thought it was very rich of Soubry the other day to cry foul when she objected to her – and the other remainers who were highlighted , because they voted against the Government ; she was reported as saying ” It was undemocratic !”. A supporting analysis of the results of how their constituencies had voted showed that most had supported Brexit ; clearly these MPs do not value their role as the representatives of the people .

    The time that is now being taken up by debating all the various amendments is ludicrous . It simply shows the EU that we are not united and they can exploit our weakness .

  19. Beecee
    November 16, 2017

    Some. like Mrs Soubry, will use any device to continue to stab Mrs May in the back. Her revenge at being fired by Mrs May knows no bounds.

    The other Parties will also use any opportunity to bring the Government down, including Labour MP’s who are also leavers.

    Today I read that Mrs May will up her payment offer to get the talks moving.

    What a stupid thing to do!

  20. am
    November 16, 2017

    ON the BBC thi morning I caught the end of a committee interview of the Prime Minister of Gibralta on trade. Gibralta is a pioneer of a system called assicuda which is easy to implement and to the advantage of traders and governments who collect revenue from these traders. I didn’t find thee link on the BBC Parliament website but it seemed a useful discussion of how to ease any difficulties of borders and trade on the heroic brexit day.

  21. adams
    November 16, 2017

    How will we get out of the EU if we donate our armed services to EU Control ?
    The latest very worrying rumour is that last Monday 13 Boris Johnson went to the EU discussions and the signing ceremony of the new EU Army . He mentioned The EU Cathedral and Britain being the flying buttress !!!
    The rumour is that all the paperwork for us to join the new army is signed and a fait accompli . Just a matter of handing it to Madam Mogerhini .
    Lovely . Do you have more info on this and will it get a mention in Parlaiment ? It is a very important indicator that Britain will never Brexit . despite the T May smoke screen .

    1. adams
      November 16, 2017

      Still awaiting moderation . WHY JOHN ? Is it something I said ?

  22. BOF
    November 16, 2017

    With the best deal being no deal, it is, first of all, to be hoped that the EU will not be able to agree any deal at all. This is likely as all 27 have to approve any such deal.

    Secondly, with May & Hammond proposing a two year transition and handing over a king’s ransom, then it is to be hoped that our Parliament will also not approve the final deal.

    Great news, we still leave, but under WTO which, as we have known all along, is by far the best deal of all.

  23. David Murfin
    November 16, 2017

    What we are (should be) negotiating for now is an agreement between th EU and the UK with the status of a third country – ie an EU-nonmember. Negotiations on what is in that can go on forever, with the difference that as soon as we are out of membership we stop paying members dues, and stop being subject to EU laws and Directives. The sooner the better. We can always agree to contribute to useful things like scientific co-operation. If the EU wants strings attached to such which we do not like, we should not offer the money.

  24. Denis Cooper
    November 16, 2017

    Before the referendum I was inclined to say that if we voted to leave but the two year guideline period for withdrawal negotiations laid down in Article 50 TEU proved to be too short to finalise some complex technical details then there would always be the possibility of agreeing to extend the negotiations for a few weeks or months or whatever.

    However that was in the possible scenario where both sides were making an effort to negotiate in good faith. That is clearly not the existing scenario, instead the EU has decided not just to mess us about but take the mickey out of us, and their perfidy would not be addressed by adding more time to the negotiating period.

    Moreover it is perfectly obvious that some of those in the UK who object to the date and time of our withdrawal being put into legislation are still hoping to prevent it happening and will use every possible delaying tactic to try to achieve that. They say that nobody is seeking to prevent Brexit, that has been decided, and they just want to get the best deal blah blah blah, but they are lying through their teeth.

    Clearly it would be against parliamentary conventions for this self-evident truth to be baldly stated by one member about another in either house, but those of us who are not in Parliament can and should call out these liars and hypocrites:


  25. Doug Powell
    November 16, 2017

    What bloody well annoys me is the PM keeping banging on about ‘bringing the country together!’
    Any reconciliation can ONLY BEGIN once we have left the EU! At that point the weeping Remoaners will have a decision to make.

    Either emigrate to the EU Utopia flowing with no democracy, no accountability, accounts never signed off, OR accept the will of the British People and reside among our regained Traditions of democracy, accountability, fair play etc.

    The Remoaners idea of reconciliation is to scrap Brexit! – NOTHING LESS! All this crap from the PM about ‘togetherness’ only encourages them to re-double their efforts to thwart the result of the Referendum!

    Get real Prime Minister! Your ignorance of understanding people is much in evidence!

    1. Doug Powell
      November 17, 2017

      JR, Many extremely able people contribute to this site. One can only hope that in the National Interest, some would be willing to allow their names to be put forward for consideration to become the Prospective Parliamentary Candidate for the Broxtowe constituency at the next general Election.

  26. Mick
    November 16, 2017

    I see the remoaners still being given more airtime than Brexiters, with sky giving airspace to labours Yvette cooper spilling her remoaner rubbish about the boarder control and how we are going to have miles of traffic congestion at our ports without a custom union , someone should point out to these remoaners that it’s two way traffic to her beloved Europe and that the eu country’s will want there goods to flow into our country after all they sell us more than we do them,

  27. Kenneth
    November 16, 2017

    Waiting until March 2019 before we can stop sending taxpayers’ money abroad is expensive

  28. Epikouros
    November 16, 2017

    Given the intransigence of the EU negotiators a binding deadline date is essential. It negates the EU from drawing out negotiations as a tactic to claw more contributions out of the UK in lieu of a divorce bill which of course they are not entitled as they must surely be aware but refuse to acknowledge. Also as a tactic to allow the 5th column remainers and political opportunists time to possibly scupper Brexit. It also ensures all now put more effort in preparing for a no deal which as the way negotiations are going is the most likely outcome in any event. Not all will as they will forlornly cling to the belief that a deal will be made but those who do and have not already will find that their fear of a no deal outcome is in fact groundless.

  29. crazyTimes
    November 16, 2017

    I don’t know what all of the fuss is about, 11 PM on 29th March 2019 only brings departure time forward by one hour because according to A50 notice we should leave at midnight anyway? One hour earlier will be just about enough time to allow the port officials to switch off the lights in the channel ports both sides, ready for midnight. It will also allow customs and immigration officials both sides of the channel to roll out their new kiosks and queue signs with seating benches ready for passengers waiting and also be ready for WTO trading- a lot more customs officers will be needed. I fear it’s going to be back to the future 1960’s style- receipts for all goods including personal items recently purchased will have to be produced and goods declared- but that is what we voted for.

    1. Mark B
      November 17, 2017

      As you probably would when visiting the non-EU countries around the world.

    2. Edward2
      November 17, 2017

      No queues at Felixstowe despite most goods arriving from non EU countries.

  30. Iain Gill
    November 16, 2017

    Interesting to read the comments over at Conservative Home website, seems lots of people want you to become chancellor…

    Cannot happen soon enough for me, just hope you keep your links to some of us who will keep you straight…

    Hammond cannot go soon enough, a budget which hits diesel drivers and pushes up net world pollution by forcing more production abroad is a disaster electorally

    In fact can I apply to be your SPAD ? lol

  31. Fed Up and Angry
    November 16, 2017

    John – can you assure us that this is more fake news?


    According to this Reuters article (I don’t trust Reuters at all), the PM is considering offering the EU another 20BN?!

    Thanks in advance.

  32. formula57
    November 16, 2017

    The date is contentious because the legislation ought to say “29, March 2019 or such earlier date as Parliament may decide”.

    The foolish if understandable notion that the Evil Empire would conduct sensible negotiations to mutual benefit is now exposed as false and so we need the mechanism to accelerate exit as an alternative to pointlessly serving out the Notice.

    To fondly and naively suppose that post our Liberation Day we can expect friendship from the Evil Empire is likely equally foolish.

  33. Fed Up and Angry
    November 16, 2017

    Just to add, the result of paying the EU a small fortune will either result in significant tax rises or further spending cuts. Both unacceptable to the public (unless it’s the latter and foreign aid took the brunt).

    We should be spelling out that any large divorce bill (which we don’t actually owe anyway) will result in tax rises.

    1. Doug Powell
      November 17, 2017

      Quite right! The EU money is by any other name: “Foreign Aid!”

  34. a-tracy
    November 16, 2017

    “I’ve said all the way along, let’s have an independent assessment of those because I genuinely do not know at the moment who is leading on these negotiations, what faction in the cabinet is dominant from one day to the next and also what information is accuracy coming before Parliament.” John McDonnell today

    I’m under the impression that the Rt Hon. David Davis is leading the Brexit Negotiations after being made the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, with Michael Barnier on behalf of the EU. I did a quick google search that surely a shadow Chancellor should be able to do if he can’t keep up and the top 3 entries tell you clearly who is leading on these negotiations. Or perhaps David Davis or PM May could make a point of ensuring John McDonnell is put straight in front of witnesses in the next big meeting.

  35. Bob
    November 16, 2017

    Is there any truth in the report by the Sun newspaper that Theresa May is about to increase her cash offer to the EU in an effort to break the ice on Brexit talks?

    I’d like to believe it’s fake news, but alas her track record on the matter raises doubts in my mind.

  36. ale bro
    November 16, 2017

    will cheap cigarettes and alcohol return to duty free shops on this date?

  37. realist
    November 16, 2017

    “Universal Credit Roll-Out” BBC Parliament 16th November 2017
    The debate went through crescendos of emotion and loudness. One Tory MP with customary mantra said “The benefit is to encourage people to return to work. It must not be more economical to not work”
    This was countered by a Labour MP who has been an MP for some years that statistics say that working was and is instrumental in making claimants £40 better off by working therefore the changes in the welfare system are not necessary.
    It must be said in all honesty the Labour MP sounded and was most likely sincere. Right or wrong, any MP necessarily is far away economically from the life-experience of someone on benefits nowadays.
    The truth is going to work costs money, relatively big money to the poorest of us. Bus fares, train fares, bus fares to a parents house to leave the children, rather better cloths for wearing at work…colleagues expect you to dress as expensively and in the same variety as themselves. Expect you to buy a birthday card, not a cheap one each time someone has birthday, could be once per week. Expect you to contribute to presents with equal money. Expect you to go “to the pub” to celebrate that birthday, expect you to give money for leaving presents and contribute meaningfully to collections of people getting married or having a child etc etc. etc etc
    Even if someone could keep the alleged £40 in total it would amount to working for £1 more per hour than one receives staying at home. The most honest of us would be told perhaps by a less honest spouse or partner or parent: Don’t be stupid!!!!Stay at home!!!.Your children at Christmas and during the day would not thank you for not being there physically and in terms of money there for them.
    It is difficult for even honest normally hard-working people to come off benefits. It is lousy for them make no mistake. But it has to be done.
    But even a Labour MP with much experience in Parliament should realise this and stop making a nuisance about it by shouting to the gallery.

  38. chris f
    November 16, 2017


    Slightly O/T, but could you please have a word in Sajids’ ear?

    We have a housing problem, precisely because we have too many people coming to this country each year – as outlined by Migration Watch, I believe. From memory the figure was 90% of housing needs per year (new) come from migration to the UK.

    As one commentator has mentioned on another thread elsewhere…’fancy building 1000 Grenfells each year, just to house new-comers?’

    And then repeat….annually. It is total madness.

    To then go public and harangue Baby Boomers (of which I am not one) is grossly arrogant. The man is above his suitable pay grade it appears.

  39. Capt Mannering
    November 16, 2017

    Defence Aerospace Debate Parliament today.

    All MPs applaud us having nearly enough aircraft. But the fifteen to twenty year delay in wings being fitted to them could be problem in the worst scenario.

  40. Tabulazero
    November 16, 2017

    Interesting tweet from Goldman Sach’s CEO – Lloyd Blankfein

    “Here in UK, lots of hand-wringing from CEOs over #Brexit. Better sense of the tough and risky road ahead. Reluctant to say, but many wish for a confirming vote on a decision so monumental and irreversible. So much at stake, why not make sure consensus still there?”

    What say you, Mr Redwood ?

    1. Edward2
      November 17, 2017

      They are globalists and love the EU.

  41. Denis Cooper
    November 16, 2017

    Off-topic, I noticed this recent article in CityAM:


    “London is more at risk from a sudden drop in EU migration than any other city”

    and it referred to a PwC study according to which:

    “… halving net migration from the EU could reduce average UK GDP per capita by around £60 per person in 2030.”

    There is no real need to look up UK GDP per capita and project it forward to 2030 to see that even if it occurred a £60 loss would be utterly trivial; but to do a rough sum, UK GDP in 2016 was £1940 billion:


    and dividing that by 66 million would give GDP per capita of £29,400, and inflating that by 4.5% a year (2% inflation, 2.5% real growth) for 14 years, multiplier = 1.85, would give £54,400 GDP per capita in 2030, and so a £60 loss would be a 0.1% loss.

    And I would also suggest that even this miniscule gain in overall GDP per capita may not be distributed evenly, it is quite possible that the established population are losing while the immigrants are gaining.

    But what is certain is that members of the established population are losing in other ways which are not necessarily reflected in GDP, for example through housing shortages and road congestion and excessive pressure on schools and medical services.

  42. Anonymous
    November 16, 2017

    A successful obstruction by pro EU Tory rebels will see a Corbyn victory at the next election.

    Ms Soubry needs to know that this really will happen.

    This is not the moment for her to tell us she knows best and we WILL abandon the Tory party.

  43. Dennis Zoff
    November 16, 2017


    Encourage T. May to cut to the chase now: Insist the EU start trade negotiations immediately or we revert to WTO immediately…give them one month max, to make up their mind, else we close down trade discussions and move to WTO. Then watch them come running.

    We have them by the proverbial jangles, the odds are stacked in our favour! It beggars belief how poor our negotiation team are? (what we have witnessed to date)

  44. British Spy
    November 16, 2017

    Ben Bradshaw Labour MP no doubt thoroughly believes he spoke rationally and intelligently in the Intelligence and Security Committee debate today in Parliament.

    Another MP stated that the Russians “influence debates ” in the House.

    Mr Bradshaw also noted that the British Government has thus far not taken his and similar views seriously. All is not lost then.

  45. Rien Huizer
    November 16, 2017

    “It now looks clear that the EU has no wish to reach a mutually beneficial Agreement to get us out of the EU before March 2019. They are still refusing to discuss the future relationship and trade arrangements which the UK thinks it is in our mutual interest to discuss.”

    Why would they? Of course they are not going to discuss the future relationship. The Commission has no mandate to do so and the only way this could happen is if the 27 would (unanimously) agree that the mandate must be changed. And why would they do that. What benefits would the 27 derive from granting trade and related privileges to a UK that has done its best, since the refrendum, to show that both poltiticians and electorrate are unreliable and that a deal done today maybe renegotiated tomorrow because politicians are afraid that the mob will put pressure on them and that a small portion of the political class, inclusing Mr Redwood, peddle economic beliefs that may work in the laboratory but will fail utterly in a democracy.

    1. Dennis Zoff
      November 17, 2017

      Rien Huizer

      “What benefits would the 27 derive from granting trade and related privileges to a UK…”

      Are you serious about this comment?

      The 27 EU members sell circa £95+ Billion of goods each year more to the UK, than we sell back to them…that is one pretty good reason don’t you think?

      1. Rien Huizer
        November 17, 2017

        That figure includes a lot that the UK will continue to import anyway, be it with a lower Pound. It will take at least 4 years to replace EU imports and doing that without the 2 million EU workers it will be even harder.

        1. Edward2
          November 17, 2017

          Are you actually claiming 2 million people fom the EU nations currently living and working in the UK will suddenly leave ?

          1. Rien Huizer
            November 17, 2017

            They will be getting better pay and better treatment elsewhere. Labour markets in W Europe are tightening fast, especially for skilled workers. A lower Pound will depress UK wages expressed in Euros, and so on. And of course, they may not like the immigration conditions in the UK. So, “suddenly” is too fast but give it two years and you will be glad to see the backs of them. That is what most Leavers wanted, right?

          2. Edward2
            November 18, 2017

            With the minimum wage four or five times higher in the UK than in some EU nations and youth unemployment in some EU nations near 40% labour markets in the EU will have to do more than “tighten”.

        2. Dennis Zoff
          November 17, 2017

          This is just your opinion and not facts based….I am optimistic about a different outcome!

          Once we are clear from the EU shenanigans, I am again optimistic the UK will flourish. However, I sincerely hope our continuing friendship with the European peoples continues. I am very pro Europe but vehemently anti-EU.

    2. Edward2
      November 17, 2017

      By “mob” I presume you mean a majority of the electorate.

      1. Rien Huizer
        November 17, 2017

        Part of the majority of the part that showed up for the referendum. Not all Leave voters wanted what may happen when the EU crashes out without a deal and if they say so now they may well regret that come 2019. I meant the people who believe in” sovereignty” and do not understand the world we live in.

        1. Edward2
          November 17, 2017

          In the general election parties that promoted remainingin the EU failed to gain any ground and over 70% of votes went to parties that backed leaving the EU
          Additionally Parliament voted by a huge majority to agree to trigger Article 50.
          Polls still show a majority in favour of leaving the EU.
          Seems the mob have an opinion.

          1. Rien Huizer
            November 17, 2017

            True. but that does not mean that all these people want the worst (economically speaking, over the next 5 years) outcome for the UK. Many do not believe there will be a bad outcome, just because they think that the UK has something so valuable that the EU will let Britain have its cake and eat it. But that looks very unlikely by now, and that is not the matter of the money, but the simple fact that whatever deal is made with the UK my have to be renegotiated a few years later, because of…the loud minority who live in some kind of fantasy world and will be charmed by the next charlatan.

          2. Edward2
            November 18, 2017

            You think WTO rules will be a dreadful outcome for the UK
            I do not agree
            I also think nations will like offers from the UK of tariff free trade, and will want to sign agreements with us.
            It’s essentially about the UK becoming an independent nation once more.

  46. Original Richard
    November 16, 2017

    The government is absolutely right in passing legislation to ensure we leave the EU at 11pm on 29/03/2019.

    This means that even if an “interim” or “transitional” arrangement is negotiated the UK will be during this period no longer part of the EU and hence will not be subject to the ECJ, will not be a member of the SM or CU, will not be contributing to the EU budget and will be in possession of all our assets such as our fishing grounds.

    This makes sense when coupled with the request for Parliament to be given a “meaningful” vote on Brexit as it will be given a vote to either approve the trading terms with the EU or whether the government should to go back to the EU and continue with the negotiations.

    In the meantime we will have completely left the EU and will be trading on WTO terms.

    1. NickC
      November 16, 2017

      Original Richard, spot on.

  47. Andy
    November 16, 2017

    29 March 2019: A day to mourn.

    The peaceful, prosperous, friendly, open Europe which my grandfather and great-grandfather’s generations literally fought and died for – cast aside by the selfishness of my father’s generation. A generation which has known only relative peace in Europe but which takes it for granted nonetheless.

    The Baby Boomers are a failed generation. The most selfish in history. They took free higher education. They took cheap houses. They took gold plated pensions. They now take their bus passes, TV licences, winter fuel payments and other things they get just for being old.

    And they pass on to their children a debt ravaged country, where it costs tens of thousands of pounds to go to university, hundreds of thousands of pounds to buy a dump of a flat in a dump of an area, huge debts – and a country which they have turned in to an international laughing stock because of the Brexit they have imposed on the young.

    This is the failed legacy of the Baby Boomer Tories. History will, rightly, treat you with contempt.

    1. NickC
      November 16, 2017

      Andy, My father, father-in-law, and two uncles “literally fought” to ensure that every nation in Europe would be free and independent. Not so we can be ruled by unelected bureaucrats in Brussels. One of our local supporters (age 91) was a tail gunner, and proudly voted Leave.

      Most (post WW2) baby boomers voted to stay in the Common Market in 1975, but learnt from bitter experience that they had been lied to by the establishment. In voting Leave the hope is that they can bequeath to the young a free and independent nation.

      Most baby boomers got no higher education at all; few get gold-plated pensions; house prices weren’t cheap when your wage was £9 per week, and many of them were asbestos riddled pre-fabs, or back-to-backs with a shared toilet. You seem to have a peculiar idea of the true conditions baby boomers experienced.

      The debt ravaged country you speak of has become so whilst we were in the EU (and still are). Don’t want student debt? – don’t go to university – like most baby boomers. I do not know of any country in the world that wants to give up its independence, so I doubt very much that they are laughing at us for wanting what they’ve got.

      1. Andy
        November 17, 2017

        We are and always have been independent.

        The people failing to deliver decent schools and hospitals are MPs in Westminster. It is the groping elite in Parliament which consigns is to traffic jams and overcrowded trains by failing to invest in transport. There is a housing crisis not because of anything the EU has done but because British politicians are a special combination of inept and corrupt.

        The EU is a trade club. It exists to facilitate trade. All those rules and regulations Eurosceptics deride actually make it easier to sell our products in a market of 500m. Restricting that market – which is what Brexiteers voted for – simply makes us poorer.

        In the meantime your hospitals, schools, houses, roads and railways will not get better because the lousy politicians in Westminster – many of whom are basically on the take – are incompetent and dishonest. I wonder who the will blame for their failings when they can no longer blame the EU?

        Oh, and yes, incompetent Brexit Britain is a laughing stock.

        1. Edward2
          November 19, 2017

          You need to read Lisbon and Mastricht treaties Andy
          If only the EU was a just a trade club.
          You are much mistaken
          Read the five Presidents report showing aims of a United States of Europe with its own defence force, common taxation, ambassadors in every nation, common legal systems, open borders and continued expansion of new member states.

    2. Mark B
      November 17, 2017

      This is the failed legacy of the Baby Boomer Tories.

      Many of which voted Labour in 1997.

      Still, it could be worse ? We could be like Greece or Spain. Look at their young and what membership of the EU has done for them ?

    3. Edward2
      November 17, 2017

      You are confusing Europe with the EU

  48. Trumpeteer
    November 16, 2017

    You have to wonder whether the Chancellor will actually write his Budget in advance of the US Tax Vote. This vote has to have consequences for us. Some immediate.

  49. Bricked Dog
    November 16, 2017

    Mrs May is said to be going to help build houses. Good of her. She should be careful though when carrying a hod of bricks especially up a ladder. It can be life changing.

    1. Mark B
      November 17, 2017

      This is what I like about these politicians. Always ‘they’ are going to do it, as if they are actually physically going to make something happen.

      As the late Mrs. T once is alleged to have said; “The problem with today’s politicians is, they think that once they have said something, then something has been done.”

      The current incumbent at No.10 does rather seem to fit that description.

  50. Alison
    November 16, 2017

    Superb speech, thank you. I write circa 22.20 hrs Thurs 16th, having skimmed Sueddeutsche Zeitung’s summary of David Davis’ speech at their annual event. Much as I admire David Davis, apparently he told the German audience that ‘London is hoping’ that the 14 Dec EU summit will consider a transition phase of about 2 years. According to DD’s speech, during this phase the UK will keep the ‘rights and obligations of an EU member’ and ECJ jurisdiction. Sueddeutsche Ztg then itself says that ‘it will be virtually impossible, [for the UK] to conclude trade agreements with other economic powers, because Brussels is responsible for tariffs and trade policy’. During which time, Brussels will make sure EU agreements are in place with these other powers. Not clear about freedom of movement, but I assume this will still be imposed …
    The proposed transition period is sheer lunacy. Perhaps its only advantage might be that sterling will stay weak. It is certainly an excellent way to turn the UK into a non-entity for 2 years.

    1. Mark B
      November 17, 2017

      I agree. Sadly.

    2. Henry Spark
      November 17, 2017

      David Davies started out as an extreme Brexiteer. But he now recognises reality, and the very bad position the UK is now in.So he is making – big – concessions. Reality is a concept Mr Redwood would never recognise!

  51. Chris
    November 16, 2017

    It is essential that this last minute attack to try to prevent Brexit is warded off. It does not give us sovereignty, and is full of caveats. They seem to think that by offering something on freedom of movement they will get our politicians to act against the will of the people. This displays such arrogance, and shows utter contempt for democracy. We, the people, do not matter to these politicians. They think, apparently, that they can operate on a different plane, i.e. “post democracy” politics. It will not do, and Theresa May and our government have to stand firm. If not, our democracy is indeed doomed.
    Germany’s plot to DERAIL Brexit: Desperate leaders to DEMAND the EU keeps Britain in bloc.
    A GERMAN plot to keep Britain in the EU is set to be unveiled on Monday.

    1. Chris
      November 16, 2017

      The Telegraph is reporting that May has given in to the mutineers’ demands over the date of leaving. What a weak woman, and what a disaster, in my mind.

  52. Rusie Lee
    November 16, 2017

    David Davis wishes us to focus on what he and the UK Opposition put before our eyes.
    In the background he has said at least three times to my knowledge in the House he is fighting for EU citizens here, surprisingly against EU wishes, to retain their vote in UK elections and what’s more for their relatives to enter the UK to stay and they too having a vote. This of course would probably favour the Labour Party in Constituencies with a high EU citizen presence.
    Is this a background behind the scenes deal by Brexit Ministers/negotiators for the acquiescence of the Labour Party in not really opposing Brexit except in shouting words?
    Our democracy should not be negotiated away giving the Labour Party MPs adn Councillors they should not have. It is treachery against our people and against democracy. Mr Davis, should focus on the EU and stop photo-shopping, as it were, with Wards and Constituencies. We can see through it. It is fake!

  53. Juiliet
    November 17, 2017

    May poised to bow to demands of Brexit “mutineers” by dropping Britain’s EU exit date from legislation governing UK’s withdrawal, reports the Telegraph.

    This is disappointing it would seem we’re blowing hot air and backtracking at each stage and looking weak in the media.

  54. Dedicated Leaver
    November 18, 2017

    Would someone please explain to me why so many of our politicians believe that they are incapable of protecting our rights, environment, health and way of life without the EU!?!

    Every time that our politicians state this they are in effect stating that they,  and our parliamentary system, are not fit for purpose.

    Personally I would take our system (and even our politicians) over the EU, MEPs and Commission any day.

  55. Michael Staples
    November 20, 2017

    My worry is that a great deal is proclaimed by May, we pay the EU ransom demand, a short post-Brexit implementation period is agreed to tie up a few loose ends, then France, Germany and the EU Parliament refuse to ratify the deal. The Government collapses letting Corbyn take over, who applies to rejoin the EU without any of our current opt-outs.

Comments are closed.