The EU Withdrawal Bill

We were told yesterday that the government invites Parliament  to consider the Lords Amendments to the Withdrawal Bill, starting on Tuesday June 12th. These need to be carefully considered by the Commons with a view to making final decisions as soon as possible.  Where the Commons decides to disagree with a Lords Amendment it will be because the amendment waters down the commitment to implement the wishes of the voters in the referendum. I trust that any Commons vote to reverse a Lords amendment will be end of the process.

The role of the Lords is to ask the Commons to think again. Traditionally the Lords does not oppose matters which form part of a governing party’s Manifesto commitments. You would have thought the Lords would be even more careful about a commitment that stems from a free vote of the electorate. We were all told in a government leaflet that we the people were making the decision, so Parliament should now facilitate it.

There are all too many times when the Commons does not scrutinise a Bill extensively enough, owing to a lack of interest by the current Opposition. Then the Lords have more justification in detailed examination. No-one can deny that the EU Withdrawal Bill has been one of the most scrutinised Bills in history in both Houses. We have not lacked debate, insights, counter proposals or arguments. What we now desperately need are some decisions. That is what the Commons must now do.

It is important the Bill has passed all stages by the time the Prime Minister goes to the June 28 Council. It will show our EU partners that we are getting on with all necessary preparations and are serious in our intent. There are some on the continent who seem to think if they help Remain influences in the UK delay the process they might force us to think again. Almost two years have passed since the decision. It is high time Parliament confirmed the decision one more time. In voting for the EU Withdrawal Bill in its unamended form the Commons will be reaffirming its careful consideration of this Bill the first time round, and reinforcing its overwhelming vote to send the Article 50 letter. That letter, after all, was the effective Parliamentary decision to leave the EU. The purpose of the Withdrawal Bill is to ensure there is legal continuity when we leave. Sensible Remain supporters accept that a decision was taken on June 24 2016, and want to see the legal continuity the EU Withdrawal Bill can bring us.


  1. oldtimer
    June 5, 2018

    I trust that this House of Commons will remain true to its commitment to honour the referendum result by passing the Withdrawal Bill without any fundamental amendment. If it does not respect the referendum result it will demonstrate beyond doubt that, as in the EU Commission, so in Parliament there is no room for democracy.

    1. Stephen Priest
      June 5, 2018

      Large numbers of Remain supporting politicians, journalists and institutions do no believe in democracy.

      Look how little the EU loving BBC reports on the EU and Europe.

      If it did it would have to report the constant interference by the EU in member states’ internal politics. It would have to report on Jean-Claude Juncker calling Italians lazy. Imagine if Trump said that about Mexicans.

      It would have to report the EUs 10% tariffs in US car imports, while that US has about 2% tariffs on car imports.

      It would have to report that Germany has the worst record for breaking EU rules.

      It would have to report that young Italians are extremely Eurosceptic.

      1. Nig l
        June 5, 2018

        It would have to report that Theresa May is pushing back meaningful proposals yet again and is giving every indication that her lack of leadership, ideas etc means basically she and therefore the U.K. is waiting for something to turn up.

    2. Fish Knife
      June 5, 2018

      Next Tuesday names will be taken and if necessary Brexit candidates will stand in each and every one of those constituencies at the next election.
      It will be interesting to see how TM votes.

  2. Lifelogic
    June 5, 2018

    “Sensible Remain supporters”, how many of these are there? Not very many can one now be a sensible remain supporter? A few sensible ex remain supporters perhaps.

    Gove’s idiotic and poorly thought through ban on Ivory discussed today I see. Gove really has gone totally potty after his knifing Boris and proposing VAT on private school fees (which would surely raise a net negative in taxation and damage some of the best schools too). Doubtless the virtue signaling, ‘group non think’ MPs will push it all through.

    Interesting to read that the ‘Stay put’ fire policy failed after half an hour at Grenfell. So it was the ‘fire policy’ that failed was it. Not the senior fire service people on duty? Rather like blaming the computer? It was blindingly obvious to anyone sensible (with some experience or knowledge of fires) just from initial TV footage that the people should have been told to get out as soon as it was clear that the flames were creeping up the outside a few minutes after the initial fire. So why were these paid fire ‘experts’ so absurdly slow to make this decision?

    Many being told to stay in their flats even very many hours later with totally disastrous consequences. Will they prosecute that ‘stay put fire policy policy that failed’ perhaps?

    1. Lifelogic
      June 5, 2018

      Gove should really be promoting education top up vouchers for child and tax relief for people using private schools so as to raise overall standards, lift the burden on state schools and improve freedom & choice for everyone.

      Not the complete reverse.

      1. Hope
        June 5, 2018

        No right minded person would ever trust Gove let alone do business with him. He is a untrustworthy figure in the Tory party and why people should not trust a word they spout. The Trojan horse brought back by May to mislead the people once again, to keep the U.K. In the EU by another name.

        Per Guido yesterday, highest taxation party for two generations, higher than Gordon Brown and New Labour. Javid imposed 5.6 percent hike in council tax despite promises of a cap! Plus add ons which are also taxed by separate budgets! May hammered for her dementia tax lies at the last election when we were promised by the Tories, several times, of it being capped!

        Hunt now wanting to tax us from for his incompetence of not running the World Health Service properly or collecting charges from those who use and abuse it! JR made the point of the lack of charges to EU countries. Sack him, bring in a person who is capable running it.

        Tories answer to incompetence incompetent ministerial governance: tax, tax, tax, tax.

        1. JoolsB
          June 5, 2018

          Totally agree with you Hope. But all the things you mention, the hike in council tax to pay for social care, the dementia tax and the proposed income tax rise to pay for the NHS are all devolved so would only hit the already hard pressed English taxpayer and therefore this Tory Government couldn’t give a stuff just so long as they don’t upset the Scots or the DUP!!!

      2. Know-Dice
        June 5, 2018

        LL agreed, VAT on private school fees would inevitably push many parents back in to the state sector and how much would that cost?

        A badly thought out plan…

        Grenfell – The building was inherently unsafe and the fire brigade mistaken thought that it met building regs which it clearly didn’t, but they [LFB] were certainly too slow to evacuate the building.

        1. Lifelogic
          June 5, 2018

          It was obvious to me as soon as I saw the flames on tv the outside they should evacuate. Why not to them?Blame also the greencraps religion that paid a fortune to insulate is pointlessly.

        2. a-tracy
          June 5, 2018

          A few years ago the Fire Brigade used to send fire teams around to all buildings over three stories high regularly in my area. They would want to know your evacuation plan with the key point being to form an orderly exit using the stairs as quickly as possible. If the stairwell was blocked using an alternative exit point. Where you would be assembling. What firefighting equipment you had and whether you knew how to use it. They would check you did fire drills. You weren’t storing combustibles in the stairways and exits and that the fire door closures were all working.

          They passed this responsibility over onto businesses and you have to have a fire marshall and do these checks and drills regularly or you have to pay someone to do them. Don’t these housing associations have to do them at all? Don’t buildings over three stories tall have to test the fire alarm system once per year? I wonder when the last fire brigade inspection of the building was done?

          Shouldn’t all 300 identified high rise at-risk buildings have this fire inspection done now by the fire brigade, so there are rescue plans put in place for them all?

          We hear of fire crews being held up and not used in Manchester because of health and safety concerns even though all the other services turned up. the problem with drip, drip news being fed out each day is people like me jumping to conclusions and not feeling safe. I wonder who wrote the stay put policy, when was it written, who by, when was it last reviewed, is it still in place now because sadly I don’t think the public will take fire service advice in the future now.

          1. miami.mode
            June 5, 2018

            a-t. The stay-put policy was probably years out of date. I’ve previously lived in an 18 storey block almost entirely made of concrete and any fire would more than likely have been confined to one apartment. The policy was not updated to comply with the refurbishments.

        3. stred
          June 5, 2018

          There are so many pages of building regulations applying to fire spread in tall blocks, including approved construction, based on tests of combinations of cladding, that it will be difficult to ascertain whether anyone, including Building Control, was solely responsible. Apart from building regulations, there are many other documents on the subject which would have been available. In the end, no-one was personally in charge of every aspect of construction, as the project was a package priced by contractor and subcontractors.

          1. stred
            June 6, 2018

            Also, there had recently been a fire in a high rise block in South London where fire had spread up the outside and, after residents had been told to stay in their flats, some died trapped. There was a report which took ages and the judge found he also found the regulations incomprehensible. Despite this, the policy of stay and wait remained.

    2. Beecee
      June 5, 2018

      I read that Mr Gove is top of the Tory Ministers approval ratings. Clearly his Blairite ‘a new initiative a week’ plan is working well.

      Much easier than actually doing something!

      1. Tad Davison
        June 5, 2018

        Ministers are turgid at best, they need moving forward with a cattle prod!

        No wonder the public hold most politicians in so much contempt.


    3. Ghost of JB
      June 5, 2018

      Please stay on topic, a section for “rant of the day” could be found somewhere else, I’m sure.

  3. Peter Wood
    June 5, 2018

    Good Morning,

    Lets get this item correct; upon passage of this Bill, the UK government agrees to pay the EU 39 Billion Pounds, and there is no obligation on them to enter into any form of FTA with us? Its a gift?

    Dr. Redwood, please advise.

    Reply False. This Bill does not legislate for the “deal”

    1. Dave Andrews
      June 5, 2018

      What about the corollary if the withdrawal isn’t passed by the day we leave? What happens then? Do the EU powers default to the Crown? Are they then at the discretion of the government or the High Court?

      1. Andy
        June 5, 2018

        If the Bill is not passed by the time we withdraw, or Mrs May kills the Bill if the amendments are unacceptable (as I would urge her to do) the original European Communities Act of 1972 becomes redundant and all EU Law which is not incorporated into UK Law falls away. Some MPs seem to think that by destroying this Bill and not repealing the 1972 we somehow will remain dafacto in the EU: this is entirely incorrect. We are members of the EU by Treaty and once those treaties are denounced that’s that.

        1. NickC
          June 5, 2018

          Andy, True and all those Remains who are having hysterics about not being in a/the “customs union” with the EU, don’t appear to know the half of it. Without patriating EU Regulations our country would simply not function. But perhaps they do know, and are simply not saying in the hope of preventing us leaving by making it impractical?.

    2. Hope
      June 5, 2018

      JR, you are misleading Mark and the readers. You have claimed several times the mantra of nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This is false and admitted by Davis and another minister as the same. If you rebutt at least be factually correct.

      You also forget this is not £39 billion estimate it also includes all U.K. Assets, per Davis to Patel in parliament, which would take the bribe/ departing gift to £100 billion of our taxes- Hunt could use this. We also have evidence this is not the full amount either by the civil service caught on tape making it clear May is using a KitKat policy to hide the true cost and ties to the EU after leaving! The traitors in parliament should be called out for what they are. They are traitors against the electoral democracy.

      Parliament showed itself to be cesspit of corruption in 2009, instead of acting to clean it up as we were promised, parliament has tightened its corrupt rules to prevent scandals being made public and MPs still police themselves despite telling us otherwise. Time the cess pit was sorted out. If leaving the EU is not delivered in full it and the MPs serve no purpose to the public

      1. David L
        June 5, 2018

        So are you saying that we’re leaving the EU so this corrupt lot can rule us rather than the corrupt lot in Brussels? My problem with Brexit is that after it happens there will be no discernible difference, a less than honourable ruling elite will still call the shots. And to vote them out requires a credible and honest opposition. Any sign of one?

        1. Hope
          June 5, 2018

          Not at all. The puppet govt implements what it is told by the EU. The farcical difference between Labour and Tories is just a charade. Both even claimed intitiativ s were there’s when it came from the EU and did not dare to criticize rotten ideas.

          When we leave it means we vote in and out those who create, and implement the policies we like. No more EU competence over the substantive areas of daily life. No more direct directives and refs to councils and quangos to give ministers fire walls against incompetence.

          What I want to hear from JR is when there will be a true bonfire of quangos used to implement EU dir crimes and refs. All should go through parliament instead with proper scrutiny and debate. Oust May and her ilk to secure a true free press to highlight and put them on the spot to justify their decisions.

          The corrupt charade of this puppet parliament can be brought back to life for the benefit of our democracy and the people it serves. Those who do not like making decisions need not apply, those who do not like taking responsibility need not apply those corrupt dishonest MPs. Civil servants to act for their ministers not the EU commission. Icing on the cake would be an elected Lords.

    3. Peter Wood
      June 5, 2018

      Dr Redwood, thank you for your reply. Yes, I understand that there is a ‘withdrawal agreement’ to be entered into with the EU, but the terms of that are based on the Withdrawal Bill, which requires NO conditionality, with respect to a FTA, on the payment to be specified in the withdrawal agreement. I would urge you to review 23rd May Committee meeting for exiting the EU with Ms. Braverman attempting to answer this question. May I request you look into this on behalf of taxpayers, to ensure this payment is not a ‘gift’.

      Reply The Withdrawal Bill is silent on the issues of the so called Withdrawal Agreement. The Bill just cancels the powers of the EU on March 29 2019 and ensures legal continuity. If there is a final Withdrawal Agreement with large payments to the EU that will require new legislation.

      1. acorn
        June 5, 2018

        There are twelve (12) Brexit Bills so far. Two of them are the EU Withdrawal Bill and the Withdrawal Agreement and Implementation Bill. The money is in the second one.

        The 39 billion whatever, is what we owe to settle our Article 50 leaving. It is not optional on getting a future trade deal, and can’t be under WTO rules.

        1. NickC
          June 5, 2018

          Acorn, The £39bn is a bribe pure and simple and, worse, is a net figure after our assets are taken into consideration.

          Any payment by the UK to the EU to honour our Vienna commitments cannot exceed what we would have paid (Mar 2019 – Dec 2020) as full members under our MFF obligations. That amount is about £35bn gross (21 months at £20bn/yr) which is about £20bn net benefit to the EU. Deducting our assets reduces that £20bn figure effectively to zero.

          If we do bribe the EU with £39bn the perpetrators will go to prison, even if it takes a decade.

          1. acorn
            June 8, 2018

            Utter and total nonsense; but, typical Brexiteer bullshit.

      2. Ian wragg
        June 5, 2018

        God help anyone who votes to hand over a single penny of our to the EU without a FAT. We really would smoke out the Brussels shills.
        Handing over money for no quid pro quo would suicide for any MP.

        1. Ian wragg
          June 5, 2018


          1. Hope
            June 5, 2018

            That is what May has planned of according to Davis and the other minister, before anymtrade deal agreed! Idiots.

          2. L Jones
            June 5, 2018

            But why hand over ANY money in the interests of trade?
            Isn’t that bribery?

  4. eeyore
    June 5, 2018

    The lines are drawn up and the guns begin to speak. All who believe in Britain, democracy and prosperity will wish JR and his colleagues well in the great Parliamentary votes this summer.

    These votes are historical landmarks comparable to the Norway debate of 1940 and the Great Reform Bill debates of 1832. Truly, we are privileged to live in momentous times.

    1. Graham Wood
      June 5, 2018

      Eeyore. Indeed so. Meanwhile why not sign up to membership of THE LIST which advocates Brexit policies identical to those of our host.

      I am certain that the 1,200,000 members can’t all be wrong!

      1. Peter
        June 5, 2018

        Thanks for this. I was unaware of the campaign. I am not on Facebook.

    2. Tad Davison
      June 5, 2018

      We’ll be even more privileged if we can finally regain our cherished democracy and extricate ourselves from an institution that grows more centralised and totalitarian in its nature with each day that passes.


  5. Lifelogic
    June 5, 2018

    Let us hope Ministers at least decide to get on with Heathrow today after all this dithering an delay. Though we clearly need a runway at Gatwick too and a HS train link to Heathrow, to get decent five runway London Airport Hub as is needed.

    A Gatwick runway would be faster to get into action so that should be build starting now.

    We will see what this hopeless & dithering government do another inquiry/report perhaps?

    1. Lifelogic
      June 5, 2018

      Only about 25 years after the runway should have been given the go ahead.

    2. niconoclast
      June 5, 2018

      Far be it for me to play the role of the boy challenging the King’s deficiency in the sartorial dept lol but exactly Why is the State making decisions about what should be the sole preserve of the free market re Heathrow? Darn, its that Mixed Economy thing again and sure explains why the Heath row is the longest running political soap in history.

      1. Dennis Zoff
        June 5, 2018


        People living in Harmondsworth, Sipson and Harlington will be affected. Local/Central Government intervenes on behalf of affected citizens that also have rights? Or do you believe businesses should disregard citizen’s rights out of hand?

        Personally, I believe the quicker new Runway/s are built the better. The UK needs them to stay competitive. But I also believe all citizens should be beneficiaries; not simply pander to business interests, disregarding citizen concerns in the process, without discussion!

        Though I grant you, Government have been pathetic again!

        1. niconoclast
          June 5, 2018

          Its up to the courts to decide the matter as complex issues are at stake but it is not certainly the role of the State to decide what is or is not built and it should not have the right to exercise the principle of eminent domain or its uk equivalent as it is doing in an outrageous way re HS2 and no doubt re Heathrow and attaching all sorts of onerous prohibitively expensive conditions and costs re the attendant infrastructure, amenities etc. Talk about gov overstretch One intervention into the market – or what is left of it – begets another..

    3. Bob
      June 5, 2018

      Mr Cameron in 2009 said: “The third runway at Heathrow is not going ahead, no ifs, no buts.”

      In Hong Kong, the govt recognised that Kai Tak had past it’s “use by” date and made the sensible decision to build a new coastal airport where planes could take off and land over open water, thus obviating the nighttime curfew imposed by overflying residential areas.

      1. acorn
        June 5, 2018

        Boris accidentally came up with a similar idea. (OK, the guys he employed, who knew what they were doing, came up with the idea.) The Thames Estuary Airport, is still the best option from all angles.

        The Davies Commission killed it, for the government of the day, too “frit” to make a decision. Not exactly the finest example of the UK parliament “taking back control”.

        The government can use its own currency issuing powers, to build anything it wants, to the extent that it uses up the physical resources, labour and materials, available to it, in the private sector; up to the limit of creating excessive inflation of those resources.

        In a sovereign fiat currency economy, nobody can finance a project cheaper than the currency issuing government Treasury; and, that Treasury, can never go broke in its own currency.

      2. alan jutson
        June 5, 2018


        Agreed, Boris Island seemed a sensible location to me, avoiding flying over London and giving a destination to the east instead of overloading passengers to the West of London.

        It meant they would have to sort out the wreck of the Montgomery though.

    4. Ed Mahony
      June 5, 2018

      Look at how planners and governments have wrecked our towns (and countryside near the towns) in the last few decades – affecting, in the long term, businesses, business infrastructure (companies don’t want to base themselves in an ugly town if they can help it – one of the major problems that Frankfurt has, some/many think it is too boring and ugly to work there), and a sense of British patriotism.

      Business and the economy is as much about imagination and creativity and vision as it is about numbers and accountancy. The accountants have looked at Heathrow and said we need another runway. But are applying no imagination to the damage it will do to London in so many ways (noise pollution but in other ways as well) – and this will affect London as a desirable place to live for people in the City, as well tourism, and British patriotism.

      1. Ed Mahony
        June 5, 2018

        London is the GREATEST city in the world. Why on earth would we want to wreck that? It makes no long-term economic sense (or patriotic sense). Just politicians listening to accountants and short-term finance. No long-term economic vision / creativity behind it.

  6. mick
    June 5, 2018

    Sensible Remain supporters accept that a decision was taken on June 24 2016, and want to see the legal continuity the EU Withdrawal Bill can bring
    The only problem with that statement is that Westminster is full of Eu loving mps and lords, the snooner this matter is settled the better and if by chance Mrs May is defeated then she should if she can call for a GE and let the people fill Westminster with true British patriots

    1. alan jutson
      June 5, 2018


      Would have thought if Mp’s loved the EU so much they would want to keep EU law, which is exactly what the bill is all about, so why do they object to it?

      Politics for politics sake !

      Madness yet again.

  7. Adam
    June 5, 2018

    One important amendment the Commons should include is expelling the many low-quality ‘Lords’ who oppose the democratic choice of British citizens. Too many dumbed-down appointments in that chamber have resulted in the worthlessness & obstruction prevailing there. Drain the swap!

    1. JoolsB
      June 5, 2018

      800 and growing unelected and unaccountable has been politicians and cronies allowed to thwart the will of the people and still not one proposal on the table from those in the other place to get rid of any of them. Not even any criticism. The reason is obvious. They all hope to be in there one day themselves on their tax free £300 a day just for signing in.

      Snouts in the trough spring to mind. Democracy in this country is a farce.

  8. Peter
    June 5, 2018

    I am sure many on the continent will be encouraged by the fact that, two years down the road, so little has been achieved on Brexit and so many in Britain continue to oppose it.

    Remain seem to be winning in their attempts to scupper Brexit.

    Weak leadership makes it easier for them.

    1. Fish Knife
      June 5, 2018

      Peter, I’m sorry I don’t agree.
      Mrs. May isn’t weak, she is just up against an opponent that doesn’t have a reverse gear or the welfare of it’s population at heart.
      Brussels just wants control.

      I doubt many in Britain want to leave Europe.
      Brussels is pushing us out.

      The Eurozone is ensnared by Monnet’s scheeming and the German control of the Euro.
      Mrs. May is giving the 27 (25?) time to understand exactly our ejection entails – Higher bills & Austerity, austerity and more austerity.

      Saying goodbye to the financial clout of London; a fifth of their contributory budget; an equal sum, annually by way of VAT; a voice (and jobs) for the beleaguered unemployed and poor.

      Saying Hello to protection of German and French profits – meaning higher prices on lots of things from food to solar panels (and cars that lie); a fight with Trump who is fed up of subsidising Europe; a Bureaucracy that can’t protect against the upheaval in Syria; &c., &c..

      The 25 have nine months to decide if they want our support from inside the tent – or they really don’t have a paddle.

      1. Peter
        June 5, 2018

        I disagree. Forget about previous discussions. It is all about the ability to negotiate now and Barnier’s intransigence is paying off.

        He has made it easy for a strong opponent to walk away by saying he does not wish to negotiate.

        He knows Mrs. May is a weak opponent though.

      2. Know-Dice
        June 5, 2018


        “The 25 have nine months to decide if they want our support from inside the tent – or they really don’t have a paddle.”

        They [the remaining EU countries] had that option when Cameron sailed around Europe before the referendum, they missed the boat, the horse has bolted the stable door is shut…

        Sorry about the mixed metaphors 🙁

      3. Dennis Zoff
        June 5, 2018

        Fish Knife

        “I doubt many in Britain want to leave Europe. Brussels is pushing us out”

        Rather pernickety I grant you, but….we are leaving (the democratically voted result) the EU’s insidious construct, not Europe!

      4. NickC
        June 5, 2018

        Fish Knife, The EU does not get to decide. MPs do not get to decide. We, the people of the UK, get to decide. And we did, on 23rd June 2016. A majority of voters decided to Leave by c52% to c48%. And we are (assuming Mrs May does as instructed) leaving the EU; we are not leaving Europe.

        1. Peter
          June 5, 2018

          ‘assuming Mrs. May does as instructed’

          That is something that still troubles me.

          I suspect she will try to keep us in the dark as long as possible and then come up with a form of words that are difficult to decipher and please nobody – a variation on the mushroom theory.

    2. nigel seymour
      June 5, 2018

      Tend to agree. It’s been disappointing for leavers and June 26 2016 seems a long time ago. Having said that, there is no person in the UK or EU that can predict what will happen 29 March and we may indeed have a new PM by then. It seems that the “Brexit Means Brexit” mantra is pretty much irrelevant now with the perception TM has been left wanting on the most important thing that any PM or President (YES TRUMP) can exude. You may hate the idea of Trump but leadership he does indeed have…

      As with everything in politics, time will tell! Famously a week in politics is a long time and next week will indeed be the start of such a week…

  9. Andy
    June 5, 2018

    As a sensible Remain supporter I accept a decision to Leave the EU was made in June 2016.

    However Brexit was not defined on the ballot paper and the promises made in the campaign have all proved untrue.

    In June 2016 Brexit meant different things to different Leave voters and 2 years on it still does. You still do not agree with each other – even on here.

    In an attempt to further define Brexit Mrs May went to the country in 2017 to demand a mandate for the amputation you seek.

    She lost. The public said no. A bigger % voted against hard Brexit in 2017 than voted for Brexit in 2016.

    Sensible Brexiteers understand this mixed message from the electorate. Sadly, in the Tory party at least, there are few sensible Brexiteers left. They’ve largely become irrational ranting nutjobs.

    Along with the narrowness of the original note, polls which clearly show changing minds and events which have proven the hard-right repeatedly wrong – it is clear that the only acceptable outcome to respect the will of the people is a soft Brexit.

    Reply A pro Brexit coalition won the election, and the main party of Opposition also campaigned for Brexit! The Lib Dems who proposed a 2nd referendum lost very badly

    1. Woody
      June 5, 2018

      “However Brexit was not defined on the ballot paper and the promises made in the campaign have all proved untrue.” but “brexit” was defined .. we leave and the governmetn pamphlet confirmed that and further that we leave the so called songle market and the not awesome customs union. The side of teh argument that made many many promises that have proven untrue is the remain promise of war and pesilence and mass unemployment.

    2. Fedupsoutherner
      June 5, 2018

      Andy, when are you going to find that brain cell that seems to be missing that would remind you that we were told we were leaving the single market and the customs union? It was clearly stated by Cameron and we were told that exit from the EU would begin the next day – not two years later. I don’t see his, if you are as intelligent as you think you are, you find this so hard to understand.

    3. Denis Cooper
      June 5, 2018

      So, Andy, didn’t you receive your copy of the government’s leaflet?

      “Why the Government believes that voting to remain in the European Union is the best decision for the UK.”

      With its NINE references to the EU Single Market and its claimed benefits and the risks of no longer being part of it, etc? One of which even made a non-technical reference to the customs union, in case that is worrying you:

      “The EU operates as a single, free trading market, without taxes between borders”

      You can do the search yourself.

      Before and during the referendum campaign David Cameron and other Remain supporting ministers explicitly and repeatedly made the case for staying in the EU and thereby staying in the EU Single Market, including in that official leaflet delivered to every household at a cost of over £9 million; nobody can honestly claim that the government did not make it perfectly clear to the public at the time that the two were inextricably linked, but nevertheless a majority of those who voted still opted to leave.

      But of course anybody can say anything that suits them, dishonestly.

      1. Andy
        June 5, 2018

        The leaflet does not mention the customs union. Most people – including you and the vast majority of MPs – hadn’t heard of the customs union until well after the referendum.


        1. Edward2
          June 5, 2018

          Not awkward in the slightest.
          Both the PM and the Chancellor made several speeches explaining that leaving the EU meant leaving the SM and CU and ECJ
          Otherwise you stay in the EU
          They are the prime elements of the EU.

          As you are well aware.

          1. Hope
            June 5, 2018

            Before the vote Cameron made it clear in parliament that if we voted leave we were out of the single market and customs union. He meant it as a threat to scare, people treated him with the contempt he deserved as you could not trust him or what he said.

            You might recall Cameron stood by Hollande and smirked when Hollande made veiled threats to our country! What a shyster.

        2. Denis Cooper
          June 5, 2018

          I had probably heard of the EEC customs union before you were even born … what do you suppose was the meaning of Article 3(a) of the 1957 Treaty of Rome, the original treaty which was in force when I voted to leave the EEC in the 1975 referendum?

          “… the elimination, as between Member States, of customs duties and of quantitative restrictions on the import and export of goods, and of all other measures having equivalent effect … ”

          Followed as a logical consequence by:

          “the establishment of a common customs tariff and of a common commercial policy towards third countries”

          Do you get that part? Why are you and others like you desperate to make sure that our trade policy will not be under the control of our Parliament, because you hate our national democracy?

          Tell me what else you thought was meant by “without taxes between borders” in the government leaflet, if/when you read it.

          1. Denis Cooper
            June 5, 2018

            And before I voted in the 1975 referendum on whether we should stay in the EEC I read the Wilson government’s leaflet delivered to every household, which inter alia warned:


            “We would no longer be inside the Common Market tariff wall – but outside.”

        3. NickC
          June 5, 2018

          Andy, That’s because the EU’s customs union is part of the EU’s internal market and is not a separate treaty or policy. It was therefore discussed by Leave as part of trade policy. VoteLeave included it as no.2 of its 7 principles, so pretty important (“Second, we will retake control of our trade policy. We will leave the Common Commercial Policy …”).

          The EU was not usually discussed in terms of its treaty articles by anyone. Have you even read Lisbon? Buy a copy then you won’t look so silly arbitrarily pulling bits of the treaties out to wave around. Then you need to familiarise yourself with the EU Referendum Act 2015 in which Parliament authorised only a binary in/out referendum with no option for a half-in/half-out choice.

        4. Narrow Shoulders
          June 5, 2018

          Turkey had been admitted to the customs union prior to the referendum and that was quite well known because Turkey’s ascension and partnership in keeping immigrants out formed a significant part of the debate.

          Leave were generally better informed than remain.

      2. Tad Davison
        June 5, 2018


        You can be as forensic as you like with your replies to that one, but he’s just so blinkered and intransigent, it’s hardly worth it. It would be more productive were a university professor to try to explain Einstein’s theory of relativity to a monkey.


      3. mike fowle
        June 5, 2018

        Well said, again, Denis. For some reason Mr Redwood often responds to Andy’s comments. I don’t know why he wastes his time.

    4. Andy
      June 5, 2018

      Hard Brexiteers lost in the 2017 general election.

      Labour advocated retaining the exact same benefits of the single market.

      Together with the SNP, Lib Dems, Greens, Plaid and Sinn Fein they won more votes than you.

      They won more votes than you and the DUP combined.

      They won more votes than you, the DUP and UKIP combined.

      What part of democracy is so hard to understand?

      Reply Labour proposed an independent UK trade policy which means leaving the single market and customs union

      1. Edward2
        June 5, 2018

        Your fantasy Andy is that the last election was an EU referendum.
        It wasn’t.
        The election was fought on traditional manifesto issues.
        Brexit issue was not a main issue.
        Education care for theose pesky old people, employment and the NHS were the main issues.

      2. JoolsB
        June 5, 2018

        Andy – there is no such thing as a hard Brexit … only BREXIT.

        1. Oggy
          June 5, 2018

          You are wasting your time explaining JB, he’s been told this a thousand times – it makes no difference. Like all those beloved of the EU he just moves the goal posts to fit his rhetoric.

      3. NickC
        June 5, 2018

        Andy, There are no such things as “hard” or “soft” Brexit, there is only Leave or Remain. The ballot paper could not contain all the detail of the EU treaties, so every voter’s decision was informed by what was debated, exactly as happens in Parliament when there is a free vote.

        The general election was about many issues, but both Labour and Conservative parties committed to honouring our Referendum result to Leave the EU. What part of democracy is so hard to understand?

        1. Andy
          June 5, 2018

          None of it is hard to understand. You lost.

          The whole rationale behind having a referendum in the first place was to give the voters a say on what the UK’s relationship with the EU should be.

          That question was never answered. All we know is what voters don’t want the relationship to be.

          It’s like going in to a restaurant saying I don’t want the pizza – bring me something that I like.

          Don’t be surprised when you are served up something you find unpalatable.

          I’m enjoying this by the way. I like seeing how much trouble you are all in. It’s fun.

          1. Edward2
            June 6, 2018

            The referendum question was quite simple.
            We voted to leave.
            To take back control of our law making our borders and our money.
            It was well explained by both sides in the referendum campaign.

  10. Narrow Shoulders
    June 5, 2018

    There are some on the continent who seem to think if they help Remain influences in the UK delay the process they might force us to think again.

    I don’t think this view prevails just on the continent Mr Redwood. It is prevalent within your parliamentary party (including many in cabinet) and pervades much of our cohort of MPs.

    The Lords can be overridden so I think you need to look closer to home for the true barriers to progressing this bill.

    1. Fedupsoutherner
      June 5, 2018

      Agree narrow. The leak about queues at Dover etc were meant to pour more doubt into the minds of the electorate. I’m surprised any of us can sleep without medication!!

      1. Dennis Zoff
        June 5, 2018


        …..because, when we hear such delirious Remainer bunkum, we sleep soundly with a salaciously wry smile!

        Ahhh, the sweet smell of Remainers’s higher pitched moaning in the early morning dew…is so enjoyable!

        …in particular when Andy is ranting!

        1. Fedupsoutherner
          June 5, 2018

          Got it in one Dennis.

    2. Denis Cooper
      June 5, 2018

      “Parliament Act 1911

      The result was the Parliament Act 1911, which removed from the House of Lords the power to veto a Bill, except one to extend the lifetime of a Parliament. Instead, the Lords could delay a Bill by up to two years. The Act also reduced the maximum lifespan of a Parliament from seven years to five years.

      Parliament Act 1949

      The Parliament Act 1949 further reduced the Lords’ delaying powers to one year.

      The Parliament Acts define the powers of the Lords in relation to Public Bills as follows.

      Money Bills

      Money Bills (Bills designed to raise money through taxes or spend public money) start in the Commons and must receive Royal Assent no later than a month after being introduced in the Lords, even if the Lords has not passed them. The Lords cannot amend Money Bills.

      Other Commons Bills

      Most other Commons Bills can be held up by the Lords if they disagree with them for about a year but ultimately the elected House of Commons can reintroduce them in the following session and pass them without the consent of the Lords.”

  11. Denis Cooper
    June 5, 2018

    “The role of the Lords is to ask the Commons to think again.”

    But that is not quite how some of them see their role; for example this is what the Tory Baroness Wheatcroft wrote in August 2016:

    “With no constituents to fear and a conviction that remaining in the EU and helping it reform would be a much better option than plunging into the unknown, they would defy the whip, which cannot inflict the same pain as it does in the Commons. The Lords would be resoundingly “not content” and could remain a blockage to the legislation for up to one year.

    Much might change in that time. The EU might even concede that the UK was not the only country which needed to see some curbs on free movement and make changes. Then their lordships might argue that there was a good reason to call that second referendum and hope for a very different result.”

    In her view and that of many other arrogant, pro-EU, and anti-democratic members the role of the Lords is not merely to ask the Commons to think again, which would not take as long as a year, but to potentially create a year-long blockage to legislation.

    And that, I suggest, is where the elected House should start to put the unelected House very firmly in its place by cutting the maximum permitted period of delay to one month for all Bills, as it is already for Money Bills.

    Other suggested reforms relating to the size and composition of the House of Lords are much less important than immediately restricting their unjustifiable power to delay and block Bills passed by the Commons, and in my view the Bill to do that by amending the Parliament Acts should have been started in the Commons the moment that it became clear that Lords with zero electoral mandate were scheming to overturn the will of the people as directly expressed in the referendum.

    1. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018

      Denis Cooper

      These Jane Wheatcroft’s comments are in the public domain and therefore most probably worded without fear of reprisals. One can only imagine what is disdainfully said in private….but then we can all probably guess?

      Should we be surprised? Democratic principles are surreptitiously circumvented when not in the self-seeking interests of the so-called establishment?

  12. alan jutson
    June 5, 2018

    Mrs May not helping herself or the UK with her confused and complicated proposals in these so called negotiations, proposals which are so confused, she cannot in all honesty even outline them clearly herself.
    She has with her actions I am afraid trashed the content of her own Mansion House speech.

    Clarity of vision from the PM was needed, but instead we got the fog of complication and weasel meaningless words.

    I agree a decision needs to be made, and for the sake of the Conservative Party and any Government that follows it, that decision needs to show a very clear support to leave and adopt the original Withdrawal Bill in its entirety, failure to do so leaves our Country just drifting around.

    1. Hope
      June 5, 2018

      May has never implemented any of her substantive points in speeches, red lines or strap lines to leave the EU. Name one? She has broke every substantive point and the Leave MPs have allowed her to get off the hook each time. People like JR. They talk and write a lot but have done nothing. They have allowed May to build the narrative that leaving the EU is all about a trade deal and allowed her to take responsibility for the Irish border from the EU in the knowledge the EU would never agree to any of the proposals so then UK would be tied to the EU single market and customs union in perpetuity! The DUP red line being N. Ireland treated the same as the rest of the U.K. Hence why she took the responsibility for the Irish border.

      1. Dennis Zoff
        June 5, 2018


        Excellent summation!

      2. Mark B
        June 5, 2018

        Good post. I fully support you in this view.

  13. Newmania
    June 5, 2018

    Th Nation is finally waking up to what this really means .
    Remain has now moved into a solid 5% lead according to the irreproachable pollster Peter Kellner. Working-age voters put the economy ahead of leaving the EU by a margin of 65% to 35%. The mostly retired pro Brexit constituency are admitting extreme disappointment with what they see.
    The great argument, “Oh do shut up we did all that” ..” debated it endlessly “,bla bla is a effective but for all the abuse, eye –rolling and crocodile tears about “democracy” Brexit is protected by unholy alliance of extreme right wing Nationalists and Communists who , like the old Union leaders , are intent on their own nutty agenda. There has been no real debate and there is no real vote .

    You cannot inflict poverty on working families , risk our jobs and throw ever increasing debts at our children on the say so of a minority in the country and a cabal of extremist zealots .

    Reply Brexit will mean more public spending at home and a boost to our economy when we stop paying money away to the EU. The slowdown in our growth rate in Q1 has happened whilst in the EU and has nothing to do with the referendum.

    1. BrexiteerwivMusket
      June 5, 2018

      Remain has not moved into a 5% lead. Remain ceased to exist on 24th June 2016. It lost the vote.

    2. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018


      Not more delusive bunkum from a weepy Remoaner?

      Tick Tock…11pm (GMT) 29th March 2019 is approaching fast!

      However, to be fair, we are willing to listen to your erudite and demonstrably tangible reasons for staying in the EU…………….no comment, thought not!

    3. Edward2
      June 5, 2018

      A poll which asks, which issue is most important, the economy or leaving the EU cannot properly be re interpreted as a vote in favour of remaining in the EU
      Ridiculous use of statistics.

    4. Fedupsoutherner
      June 5, 2018

      Newmania. Not another one falling for all the bad news!!! It’s all contrived nonsense but its people like you that its aimed at. Easy to fool.

    5. NickC
      June 5, 2018

      Newmania, One of the funniest things about so many Remains is that it is they who are “finally waking up to what this really means “.

      Every objection that Remain has desperately thrown at our Leave decision has been debated over the past couple of decades, usually repeatedly. Seriously, where were you and the other Remains? Did you think you can just ignore the evidence? Even your cashman Mr Soros recognises the EU has gone wrong.

  14. Brian Tomkinson
    June 5, 2018

    JR: “Where the Commons decides to disagree with a Lords Amendment it will be because the amendment waters down the commitment to implement the wishes of the voters in the referendum.”
    Really? Very many MPs seem to have nothing but scorn for the wishes of the voters in the referendum. They, as we have come to expect, are disingenuous, claiming they accept the result whilst doing all they can to delay, pervert and ultimately reverse that result. They have made clear that we who voted to leave the EU were rather ignorant and didn’t know what we were voting for. They have superior knowledge and know better. How they now regret the decision to give us a referendum which they thought they would win by mounting a fear campaign – another sign of their arrogance and contempt for the people they purport to represent. These ‘Honourable’ and ‘Right Honourable’ MPs are behaving in a most dishonourable way and if they succeed will do severe damage to our democracy. Perhaps, like their masters in the EU, democracy is anathema them.

  15. Nig l
    June 5, 2018

    And how will you head off your own rebels?

  16. Fedupsoutherner
    June 5, 2018

    Just get on with it!!!!!

  17. jack Snell
    June 5, 2018

    Barnier & Co care not two hoots about the shenanigans going on in the HoC or indeed in the Lords- we can be quite sure by now they are all looking forward to the summer hols-

    1. NickC
      June 5, 2018

      Jack Snell, Barnier & Co, having pauperised Greece, replaced two elected PMs, sneered at and threatened Italy, corruptly placed Selmayr, finger-wagged at Poland and Hungary, conned the German and Dutch taxpayers, and demonstrated nose cutting ineptitude in their negotiations with the UK, might well just be thinking of their summer hols. Although something tells me that’s not true.

  18. Den
    June 5, 2018

    Never before in the History of our Nation has Democracy been so challenged by the Elected and the non-Elected.
    Let this be a warning to all British citizens that should our final decision on continued EU membership, be swept aside, we should begin the dangerous slide towards continual anarchy and ultimate dictatorship. Precisely the reasons for wanting to leave the Brussels cabal now.

    1. Always Right, nearly
      June 5, 2018

      We of the alleged Alt-Right rejoice at the caring actions of the Lords and Reamoaners in Parliament. No we do not agree with their reasoning. But if they are successful it will bring about their ultimate downfall well within the lifetime of all people on these pages. Years rather than even one decade. Freedom, at last!

    2. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018


      One must not have any delusion 17.4 million citizens are not watching these traitorous shenanigans closely.

      Should T. May’s Government renege on the democratic vote to leave the EU, such would be the anger and political backlash as to present an opportunity to create an alternative political party…….that will execute the will of the majority!

  19. Candlestickmaker
    June 5, 2018

    The EU will not negotiate seriously just now. You must look at things from their mindset. They are not democrats. They not so much have a reverence for dictators but believe such figures carry the people with them. They particularly believe this about the UK.
    They see unelected Lords and Ladies ( with actual political power, ) our belov-ed Queen as our Head of State. So when the Madame Tussauds versions of nobility such as Blair and Major , speak with expensive designer ties hiding lack of chest hair, the EU thinks “Ahhh, Lenin is in Moscow comrades” “The Tsar is in his Counting House . ” “We’ll wait for the British to follow their waxwork ex-politicians despite their Referendum”

    Negotiations will not proceed properly until our Parliament backs its own people, the British, and thumps down the nasty amendments to democracy of the House of Lords

  20. Denis Cooper
    June 5, 2018

    Off-topic, Jean-Claude Juncker has just given a speech:

    in which he said:

    “The future of the European Union is the future of the euro, and the future of the euro is the future of the European Union as a whole.”

    Is it not difficult to see how the UK could, indeed would ever want to, fit into that kind of European Union future? So is not just as well that we have voted to leave it?

    Incidentally he also said:

    “And we stood up for fair and free trade around the world, which is a source of jobs”

    so I would really like to know how he squares that proud boast – and indeed the related solemn EU treaty commitments, which will still apply to the EU and to its continuing member states after the UK has left – with the constant threats to unnecessarily disrupt the existing trade with the UK.

    What a bunch of untrustworthy hypocrites they are.

    1. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018

      Denis Cooper

      It is no longer “hypocritical” in the intrinsic sense of the word. For theirs, it is now cognate to an ideological-religion and can mean whatever Brussels want it to mean? We see it as hypocrisy, while they see it as a means to an end “lie now, repent later” and is their hidden mantra! Communism/Nazism used this technique with initial success!

      The flaw in my mini argument however….they will never repent!

    2. Mark B
      June 5, 2018

      It is not what they say that matters, it is what they do !

      The EU will be on a wild ride to full UNION after we leave, hopefully.

      Fun times ahead for all on the continent:)

  21. Christine
    June 5, 2018

    Mrs. May states that she wants to remain in the Erasmus program and suddenly the EU increases the budget from £14.8 billion to £30 billion in their next round of spending. Is anyone asking the question regarding value for money for the UK taxpayer? Does she know only 0.5% of higher education students from the UK participate in this scheme? Is it just me or is she trying to find inventive ways to continue funding the EU via nefarious means? The whole thing stinks.

    1. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018


      Many would say absolutely correct, and yes the whole thing stinks. When the UK taxpayers money is given to the Jackals in Brussels, under a different name/project, it is there’s to do with as they so desire…and certainly not for the benefit of the British!

      Incidentally, the Erasmus+ program (minds and souls of the youth) is one of many long-term projects to bring about the desired result? – “Lessons from the past? Europe’s grand shift from cultural homogenization to multiculturalism”. An inciteful read from the London School of Economics research group (LSE) if it is of interested.

    2. Turboterrier
      June 5, 2018


      You are not alone

  22. Blue and Gold
    June 5, 2018

    If one had a friend who wanted to commit suicide, one would do the best to persuade that person from going through with it.

    Parliament has a duty to do the right thing and vote for the Lords amendments to save the UK citizens from becoming poorer and to keep the country afloat and not isolated , mid atlantic.

    Whatever the vote , the fight will continue. No surrender to the Right wing of the Tory party.

    1. Tolpuggle tomata red
      June 5, 2018

      “Whatever the vote , the fight will continue” That says EVERYTHING about your political beliefs.

    2. Edward2
      June 5, 2018

      The whole of Parliament will vote on June 12th.
      Over 600 elected representatives.
      I will accept the result of that vote.
      Will you?

    3. Fedupsoutherner
      June 5, 2018

      It’s nothing to do with the Tory party. It’s what the nation voted for and don’t forget there was a time when Labour fought an election saying they too would come out. So much for honest politics. This is why we don’t trust any of them anymore.

    4. Dennis Zoff
      June 5, 2018

      Blue and Gold

      Ditto….but vice versa! No surrender to the weepy insecure left wing of the Tory party.

      Tally ho!

    5. Adam
      June 5, 2018

      Blue & Gold:

      Your perspective describes the friend as a suicide case. The friend might describe himself as someone refusing to remain among 27 others, who want to boss him around & make him pay for their obtuse ways & wastefulness. The majority of UK citizens decided that their friends should enjoy freedom within their own home, & are working to support them on the path to goodness. Suicide might suit those who feel there is no escape from what they dislike.

  23. VotedOut
    June 5, 2018

    To disagree with Brexit is an acceptable position

    To oppose Brexit is an unacceptable position.

    Those that vote for the House of Lords amendments should consider that they:

    (a) voted for the European Union referendum Act 2015
    (b) voted for the European Union (Notification of Withdrawal) Act 2017
    (c) BOTH main parties stood for election in 2017 promising to leave the EU, Customs Union, Single Market and by extension the ECJ – tat was 80% of the vote share.

    To uphold the House of Lords amendments will make those MP’s look very duplicitous

    History will not look well on them – and they may well be held to account for their actions in the future.

    etc ed

  24. Tony Sharp
    June 5, 2018

    Why are these Amendments referred to as ‘Lords’ when in fact they passed by only between 20 and 60 votes, with the 98 LibDems votiing as a block – they are in fact Lib Dem Amendments and frankly these 98 ‘represent’ 5% of the Electorate with 12 MPs, the only ‘national unionist’ party to stand in GE2017 on a manifesto to ignore the Referendum result and overturn it. As the Government already defeated the same amendments in the Commons it is not for the Lords – or the Lib Dems, to have a second bite of the cherry. In fact the Lib dems seem to have more influence in Conservative governement policy now than they did with 50 MPs in the Cameron Coalition.
    Frankly, if Mrs May cannot get the same Bill through again she should be removed as incapable of forming a government – or leading the House. This need not mean another General Election, anymore than when Brown succeeded Blair or indeed May replaced Cameron.
    Tony Sharp

  25. Rien Huizer
    June 5, 2018

    Mr Redwood,

    Once again, where are those people on the continent that want the UK to stay in the EU? If you look at any recent comment by a leading European (EU member European) politician re brexit, you will find an attitude diametrically opposed to what you suggest. EU politicians (not necessarily MEPs and bureaucrats) are resigned to the UK leaving and fed up with the wast of time aka “negotiations”. Everyone undferstands that the UK lacks the capacity to make binding international agreements, under the current government and also under any foreseeable alternative in the near term. Regardless of the economic or political merits of a “deal”, an agreement that the other side will try to renegotiate whenever a fraction of a rulking party threatens to walk away is useless. The EU did not ask the UK to leave (it is not asking any troublesome, disloyal member to leave as you know), the UK did and if the UK cannot agree internally on a futuire arrangement that would be acceptable to all 27 remaning member states, the “no deal” would happen and several states have made preparations. Evben to the point that the Dutch government has now opened a website where business people can look at the consequences for their particular industry and situation of a variety of results varying from “Norway” to “no deal”.
    Aaparently we are now at the point that the EU is keen on the UK staying, so not staying would be a British victory, liberation. .. Just look at the most recent comments from the German counterpart of Mr Davis.

    1. NickC
      June 5, 2018

      Rien, Your comment seems almost incoherent (“where are those people on the continent that want the UK to stay” and “we are now at the point that the EU is keen on the UK staying”). And the Germans don’t have a counterpart to Mr Davis – 1. they’re not leaving the EU; and 2. Germany is a vassal (sorry, “part”) of the EU so is forbidden to negotiate on its own account.

      It depends how far you want to go back, but both Macron and Schäuble have said they would welcome the UK staying. It’s not going to happen. We will leave, but if Mrs May gets her way (if she has one) it will be a partial leave – BINO. The only thing funny about BINO is that if you don’t let us go cleanly and according to the treaties we will be back to re-negotiate in the future.

  26. Denis Cooper
    June 5, 2018

    JR, why do we have to put up with this endless stupidity?

    “Sources have told Bloomberg that the UK government will this week present a proposal to keep the UK in a Customs Union with the EU beyond the end of the transition period, but for a time-limited period, in an attempt to find a solution to the Irish border issue.”

    So I take it that nobody in the government has yet seen the EU Commission’s slide which I mentioned two weeks ago here:

    and which showed just how small a part of the full gamut of potential border checks might be eliminated by staying in just the/a customs union with the EU, all the rest requiring us to stay in the/a single market?

    For God’s sake, there are just two items marked in red as covered by a customs union, how can ministers and their civil servants be so blind, or so thick, as not to see that?

    1. Mark B
      June 5, 2018

      You do not need to be blind or thick to be complicit


  27. LukeM
    June 5, 2018

    The EU knows full well we are serious in our intent but what they still don’t know is exactly what the UK expects by way of trade with them into the future. If our i tent is to be somewhere in the middle then some of the red lines are going to have to be discarded. If no red lines are to be discarded then we are free to pursue a Canada plus plus arrangement..but that is still the problem for nobody knows what the real UK intent is.

    From the EU side we know that having our cake and eating it and cherrypicking is compleyely out stated clearly by them because of the EU four basic freedoms they hold and are not going to compromise under any circumstance. The EU doesn’t make deals they abide by rules and politocal internal arrangements..outsiders are third parties and don’t count in any of this..therefore there is little point in going on about the withdrawl bill because while it might mean something to us it means nothing at all to them.

    1. NickC
      June 5, 2018

      LukeM, You know very well that countries trade with each other without free movement and without one of the countries own laws being imposed within the other (third?) country.

      We are are cherrypicking – we have chosen to Leave and be independent, the biggest cherry a country can possess. The other EU countries can only stare enviously at us.

  28. niconoclast
    June 5, 2018

    Its up to the courts to decide the matter as complex issues are at stake but it is not certainly the role of the State to decide what is or is not built and it should not have the right to exercise the principle of eminent domain or its uk equivalent as it is doing in an outrageous way re HS2 and no doubt re Heathrow and attaching all sorts of onerous prohibitively expensive conditions and costs re the attendant infrastructure, amenities etc. Talk about gov overstretch One intervention into the market – or what is left of it – begets another..

  29. Den
    June 5, 2018

    Why does the Government still insist that being a ‘Gentlemen’ to the EU actually means something to them?
    It has all changed in Europe, ever since the Brussels cabal were granted Superiority status via the Lisbon Treaty.
    The micro-Politicians now ruling the European Empire are from the old Marxist school which believes that threats achieve more than requests. And for that reason they despise any sense of Gentlemanly behaviour, which their seize upon as a sign of weakness and seek to capitalise upon it.
    Mr Trump the USA President knows this and has adopted the ways that they do respect. Threats back up by superior power. He has the positive results that prove this is the only way forward.
    Let us now, Britain, adopt those same approaches. Or be forever derided.

  30. Lindsay McDougall
    June 5, 2018

    If the existing House of Commons fails to overturn the Lords amendments, then we need to get really brutal with Remoaners by:
    – getting Her Majesty to appoint 500 Eurosceptic peers PDQ;
    – purging CCHQ of all Remoaners
    – trying to get Remoaners removed from the Conservative candidates list
    – opposing pro-European Conservatives at the next election
    – listing the additional legislation that we will implement after the next General Election

    And simultaneously brutal with the EC by:
    – Fleshing out and preferring No Deal
    – Scrapping the transitional period
    – Going over the heads of the EC and dealing directly with individual Member States

  31. Peter D Gardner
    June 6, 2018

    “Sensible Remain supporters accept that a decision was taken on June 24 2016, and want to see the legal continuity the EU Withdrawal Bill can bring us.”

    Indeed. But they are outnumbered among your colleagues by Remainers who are not sensible.
    The first thing UK must do once it is out of the EU is to arrange a clear-out of the lunatics in Parliament.

Comments are closed.