Mrs May’s 2017 Election Conservative Manifesto said only sign a Withdrawal Agreement if there is a good Future Partnership Agreement as well

The Conservative Manifesto for the 2017 election made pledges on the matter of the EU, and has never officially been renounced or amended by the Leader. I and many others stood for election on it and supported the Brexit pledges in it. I did not support the elderly care proposals in the same Manifesto as I made clear before the election. The PM subsequently dumped these.

It might be helpful to remind the PM and others of what the Manifesto said:

“We continue to believe no deal is better than a bad deal”. The Manifesto proposed a Future Partnership Agreement but accepted it was only worth signing if it was a good one. This remains the PM’s stated view.
It also said
“As we leave the EU we will no longer be members of the single market or customs union” This too remains her view, though there is now unwelcome discussion of staying in the Customs Union for longer.
The Manifesto also saw the need for linkage between the EU wish for us to sign a Withdrawal Agreement and the PM’s wish to have a Future Partnership Agreement. “We believe it is necessary to agree the terms of our future partnership alongside the withdrawal, reaching agreement on both within the two years allowed by Article 50”. Here the PM has proceeded to negotiate mainly on the Withdrawal Agreement, making it impossible to agree a Future Partnership Agreement before we leave in March 2019. This surely means we cannot sign the Withdrawal Agreement they propose.

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

125 Comments

  1. Rien Huizer
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    When will governments adhere to their own election propaganda aka promises? A very naive perception of democratic politics. Politicians compete for votes in the knowledge that once they are in power, they can do tow things: (1) exploit the space built into well designed propaganda: ambiguity and lack of clarity and (2) use their control of the agenda to divert attention from their lack of loyalty to their promises, ideals or whatever rubbish commentators may dream up.

    But, Mr Redwood, looking at your own career, you have been consistenlly clear about your ideals and objectives, possibly resulting in missing out on the top honors. Chapeau.

    But you shoul;d not expect your colleagues who have this impossible task of governing, to be 100% honest all of the time, especially wrt important things.

    • Adam
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:50 am | Permalink

      Rien Huizer:

      The quality standards JR maintains, have not missed out, but endure above those of your so-called top, whether in office or honour.

    • Hope
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:03 am | Permalink

      JR, May has till failed to justify the £100 billion she is willing to give the EU for nothing in return. She makes lying claims of legal obligations when the Lords statemthere is there is none, she claimed to make a line by line examination. Clearly untrue. Make the bill public so we can read line by line as our public services are in a dire mess, crime epidemic, NHS unable to cope with mass immigration the same for housing and all else. I want to the bill especially as she has countenanced the dishonest KitKat policy to hide costs and ties to EU. May is completwly untrustworthy and you would have to be an idiot to believe anything she said. Ditto for Euro Hammond. Remainers supporting her extension to the extension says it all, it is a sell out and betrayal of the nation.

      The anarchy march yesterday should have been stopped. It is against our British values of Electoral democracy. Khan should have stopped it.

      • fedupsoutherner
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:59 pm | Permalink

        Hope. Well if Corbyn gets in I want another election!!

      • Leslie Singleton
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 4:16 pm | Permalink

        Dear Hope–How many of the anti Leave brigade are so solely because of well-founded financial worries about their future after we Leave. It would hardly be easy, but if there were a way to funnel the dreaded £40 billion to such people (simplistically by giving them each say £10,000 or whatever if they lose their jobs because of Brexit–something along those lines) mitigating any temporary woe caused, would not a swathe come back to an opinion based on the interest of the Nation–Sovereignty, much reduced immigration, FTA’s right and left, no ECJ etc–rather than on their own or that of their families? Consider this as inchoate brainstorming. Did not Hague say we need new ideas?

        • Hope
          Posted October 21, 2018 at 7:43 pm | Permalink

          May has sanctioned over seventy scare notices to frighten people witless. What has she produced to show the benefits of leaving? Why did she not prepare for no deal from the outset? Why did leaverslike Davis not insist upon it! Moreover why would she not do this as it is Government policy!

          Since PM she has allowed any and everyone to make detrimental comments and even slapped down leave ministers for pointing out the benefits. Why did she allow all to visit Barnier? Sadly JRM and JR were slow off the mark.

          Where is her fair to all mantra amongst this? Why did a deselected MP, after her failed election, get chief of staff job, where was it advertised, where was the selection procedure for anyone to apply? Again, you cannot believe a word she says.

          • Denis Cooper
            Posted October 22, 2018 at 8:35 am | Permalink

            I haven’t yet been able to think of any precedent for the way this duplicitous government has not only refrained from rebutting the constant stream of false propaganda directed against one of its most important official policies but has deliberately added to that stream. When Theresa May said the government would not be giving a running commentary that was not to be strictly true, what she meant was that the government would let Remoaners get away with spreading their rubbish unchallenged while using leaks and private briefings to help undermine its own policy in the hope of being able to get away with reversing it.

          • L Jones
            Posted October 22, 2018 at 5:36 pm | Permalink

            That’s very well argued, Hope. We’ve all been aware of this for a long time. How depressing it is to be ”led” by such a ”leader”.

            See Robert Browning ”The Lost Leader” – many of the words are very appropriate. How dreadful it is to be betrayed by the very person who should have been our champion.

            How many of us thought for a long time that Mrs May was being clever (like Mr Trump) and confounding the EU with her wiles. Alas!!

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:50 am | Permalink

        Denis,

        Please, kindly explain how you get to £ 100 billion?

        • Hope
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 2:13 pm | Permalink

          Davis stated in parliament to Patel that U.K. assets in the EU in addition to the £40 billion.

          There should be no bill from the EU just a return of our assets in the EU.
          JR, you might want to point this out to Hammond this afternoon.

        • Richard
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

          “eurocrats briefed German media that the tab will actually reach £90 billion. Senior EU officials boasted that they managed to pull the wool over British taxpayers’ eyes with “mathematical acrobatics”. https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/5581747/theresa-may-barnier-hide-90billion-brexit-bill/ (written by two knowledgable journalists, one based in Brussels)

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:49 am | Permalink

      Rien Huizer

      possibly resulting in missing out on the top honors.

      So very very true.

    • Tad Davison
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

      Would you therefore accept that those politicians who say one thing to get elected, then say another to wriggle out of their commitments to the electorate, are unfit to hold office?

      What about Theresa May and her Lancaster House speech, that turned out to be totally worthless, utterly vacuous, and specifically intended to deceive?

      John Redwood has been consistent throughout, and given the way the playing field of advancement is tilted in favour of those who love the EU, he has maintained his position that he knows to be right, at great personal sacrifice. We therefore owe him a great debt and our respect.

      Give me a politician who stands up for the United Kingdom, and will not compromise themselves by taking thirty pieces of silver to do the EU’s bidding, any day of the week!

      Interesting to see Sir Nick Clegg has walked into a cushy lucrative number, as did George Osborne – both of whom are rabid remainers.

      And I have been friends with MPs who in the past convinced me they were rigidly Eurosceptic, yet when the chips were down, they showed their true colours and voted remain. That makes me bitter. Where I once walked the streets for such people, now, I would cross the street to avoid them. They are not worthy of my support. Theresa May is solidly in that category.

      Tad

      • Hope
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 2:53 pm | Permalink

        Braverman the latest to lie to say Chequers honour the referendum! Repeating a lie does not make it true. If this is the sentiment of cowardly clueless leave ministers your party is doomed.

        Raab appears clueless and blinded by ambition. Any suggestion of an extension should be dismissed out of hand as a bad deal not considered. Irish still claiming the Irish border is a U.K. problem to solve!

        I note aides of May boasting that there is no chance of her being ousted, the opportunity being before summer recess, hence decision/panic to bring forward themrecess to keep her in office for her betrayal plan to work.

        • Chris
          Posted October 21, 2018 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

          Yes, Hope, they are now being very open about their deceit, if reports in the Press are true. Pride/arrogance comes before a fall, however. The Democrats are still incredulous that President Trump beat them. So, perhaps we have some hope, here in the UK.

        • Denis Cooper
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 8:40 am | Permalink

          Theresa May has deliberately allowed a molehill on the Irish border to be built up into an insurmountable mountain.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:04 pm | Permalink

        Exactly.

        “totally worthless, utterly vacuous, and specifically intended to deceive” indeed as of course was her blatant lie (during the referendum) as Home Secretary falsely assuring voters that they had control of UK borders (while in the EU) due to having opted out of Schengen! I know she is really rather dim but surely not possible that she actually thought that after year as Home Secretary is it?

      • Chris
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 7:30 pm | Permalink

        A heartfelt post, I think, Lifelogic. I agree with you entirely.

      • Rien Huizer
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 9:57 am | Permalink

        @ Tad Davison

        Not at all. Politicians must be prepared for two )possibly three) roles: (1)campaigner (during elections and while in opposition; modern politicians campaign full time, even when their space for venting nonsense is constrained by the government role)(2) government. The latter role requires living with the consequences of one’s actions and furthermore, in cooperation with non-political civil servants (I realize that some here do not believe in the impartisan civil servant but I have met many, in many countries who stick to the rules applying to their position: “good soldiers”). In the latter role, there is less scope to make empty promises (fudge always permitted etc). Besides, good government tends to be much more moderate that the political orators promise, regardless of position on the political spectrum.

        As to mr Redwood, yes I meant this as a compliment. I disagree with some of his views (especially on the relative benefits of a US vs EU relationship, although I do not believe that British politics and media cannot be reconciled with anything else than a “spoiler” role within the EU, a view that is gaining currency apparently, also among the core EU members) but believe that MR Redwood is open and consistent in his views and committed to liberal and democratic principles of government. Unlike some people in the previous Cabinet.

    • Denis Cooper
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:10 pm | Permalink

      Do you also think it’s “a very naive perception of democratic politics” that having held a referendum and expressly said beforehand in an official leaflet delivered to every household that it was the voters’ decision, and the government would implement whatever decision they made, the government should damn well get on and properly implement that decision as promised, not look for ways to frustrate it?

      • WeToldYou_No_EU
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

        Yes…quite…I have searched many times but have never managed to find the Remainers’ claim about the Referendum being “advisory”…Odd that…

        • sm
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:56 am | Permalink

          Our host will know better than me, but I understood that a Commons Clerk said that according to the wording of the Referendum Bill, it was indeed advisory. HOWEVER – Prime Minister Cameron stated in the HoC that the result would be honoured.

          Surely that staunch Remainer (and respected lawyer) Dominic Grieve, then Attorney General, should have insisted that the status was clearly defined?

          Reply The Referendum Act was silent on the issue, but the government made clear when legislating that the intention was to make it binding on Parliament.

          • NickC
            Posted October 23, 2018 at 3:55 pm | Permalink

            Sm, It was sensible to make the EU Referendum Act 2015 non-binding for all sorts of legal and procedural reasons. That doesn’t make it “advisory”. If the government had merely sought advice, then it could have been obtained from hundreds of organisations and pressure groups as well as the public via a consultation.

            The EU Referendum Act states:
            “1 The referendum
            (1) A referendum is to be held on whether the United Kingdom should remain a member of the European Union.”

            The phrase “whether the UK should remain” means a decision is to be made via the referendum, and is not merely a request for advice. That was confirmed by the government in 2015 and 2016 and by both main campaigns.

      • Rien Huizer
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 10:05 am | Permalink

        @ Denis Cooper,

        Yes, good government requires that the people are served well, not necessarily by poorly designed referenda. Good government would (in my opinion) have developed the view that there shoudl be a solution to the problem of UK and core EU (the “western” part) and that solution could well be outside membership. But transiting to a friendly and cooperative relationship. Not a sort of zero-sum repeat of the European Civil War of 1939-1945 (as distinct from the Soviet-German war of 1941-1945) but developing some for of mutually acceptable partnership. I believe that would have been possible without all the drama of a referendum. The situation we have now requires going back to the drawing board with a broken relationship that will take decades to heal. I do not believe that any form of “future relationship” to be very unstable. A view apparently shared by the shadow foreign secretary. There is no more space for a halfway house.

        • Rien Huizer
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 10:08 am | Permalink

          Apologies again for the many typos. The future relationship is likely to turn out unstable, rather than no unstable.

    • Richard
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 2:55 pm | Permalink

      Rien, you are so wrong. Our host is trusted because he is plain speaking and does not seek to misdirect, misrepresent or deceive.

      This is all really about simply whether or not The Conservative Party can be trusted to do what it promises.

      As Andrea Jenkyns put it: “Because if we don’t deliver Brexit, if we’re half in and half out, it’s going to be catastrophic for the Conservative Party. They’re not going to trust the party. In our manifesto, all of us, Brexiters and Remainers, we stood on that manifesto that we would deliver Brexit.” https://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2018/07/interview-andrea-jenkyns-prime-ministers-keep-their-jobs-if-they-keep-their-promises.html#IDComment1063563174

      • Rien Huizer
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 10:12 am | Permalink

        You have no read my comment. I complimented mr Redwood on his consistency and “honesty” (that is maybe a bit naive. even decent politicians cannot afford to be consistently honest, but relatively speaking (take for instance a former Foreign Secretary) of course) and the best evidence of that is that he was not in the Cameron cabinet.

        • L Jones
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 6:20 pm | Permalink

          Gosh, Rien. How pompous.
          ”You have no read my comment” – as if it were worth re-reading.
          And, by the way, are you Scottish, by any chance?

    • Pickwick Papers
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:51 pm | Permalink

      “wrt” was pointed!; nearing the end of your last sentence

    • Stred
      Posted October 22, 2018 at 9:39 am | Permalink

      Rien is right that John has been consistent and not lied during his career. However, surely in Holland and the UK we used to expect politicians to stick broadly to the manifesto and not to promise one thing one week and another the next. At least Claude is honest at lunchtimes occasionally and says that you have to lie. On the other hand, Theresa does not even seem to know when she is lying and truth is so flexible as to be a chimera.

  2. Yossarion
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    Sorry John, all She wanted to do was destroy UKIP, its quite clear Her intentions have been about keeping the UK together and in the EU and to hell with England and the English, We need an English Parliament now.

    • Steve
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:31 pm | Permalink

      Yossarion

      “We need an English Parliament now”

      Scotland is allowed to have their own, but we can’t because that would be racist.

      • Yossarion
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

        We should ask our Host why there is no English Conservative Party?, or maybe the Conservative and Unionist Party is just institutionally anti English?.

  3. Lifelogic
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:41 am | Permalink

    The Manifesto also says ‘lowering taxes’, ‘low taxes’, ‘taxes as low as possible’, ‘reducing taxes’, ‘simplifying taxes’ about 20 odd times. But May & Hammond clearly dropped this promise immediately (just as IHT ratter Osborne and (low tax at heart but never in action) Cameron did, just as soon as he become PM.

    Lies, lies and more lies from this essentially socialist, green crap, pro EU ‘Conservative’ party.

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:46 am | Permalink

      Lifelogic

      Why did you not leave “essentially” out? Under May and Hammond we have got the worse combination possible.

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:08 pm | Permalink

        Indeed. But for the 100 or so Tory MPs on the sound wing she and Hammond would surely be even more like Corbyn/McDonnall!

  4. Paul Cohen
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:44 am | Permalink

    As bystanders we have watched the unedifying performance of our PM in Brussels, seeing her paint herself into a corner and then getting trounced.

    We saw a peculiar strategy where we heaped gifts on the EU table, only to see them tucked away and then have them demanding more – this requires an explanation.

    Mrs May should never have been appointed PM, she had not the credentials and being a remainer advocate should have ruled her out . Indeed there were more remainers in the Cabinet than others, hardly the recipe for a determined team effort. The chancellor Hammond is lacklustre and his preferences are plain to see.

    One can’t help but think there is connivance going on to continually undermine the leave process and somehow bring about it’s failure from within. We urgently require a new team and direction to get back on track.

    • Turboterrier.
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:41 am | Permalink

      Paul Cohen

      Mrs May should never have been appointed PM, she had not the credentials.

      We all have got degrees in hindsight Paul and what makes it worse it was always bleeding obvious to the village idiot what the end result would be.

    • Richard Hobbs
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:09 pm | Permalink

      Although I read your comments every day, I don’t usually say much on this forum. I have to say, however, that Mr. Cohen sums up my feelings very well in his last paragraph. It does feel as if there is a determination to keep us in the EU at all costs and to hell with democracy!

      • Lifelogic
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:11 pm | Permalink

        Indeed “connivance” is perhaps rather too polite (between EU officials and this Government and Civil Servants (whom almost to a person are pro remain).

    • Tad Davison
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:52 pm | Permalink

      I agree Paul, except I would replace the word ‘explanation’ with ‘resignation’, or perhaps even ‘resignations’ (plural) as it is difficult to imagine a more useless government than the one we presently have. It’s full of weakling liberals in May’s own image and clearly not fit for purpose. They even struggle to fill the conference halls, with Tory delegates seeking out the largely anti-EU fringe meetings.

      That tells us all we need to know. May and her cabinet haven’t just lost a massive amount of support from the voting public, they’ve also lost a great big chunk of support from their own dwindling membership. The present government is but a ship of fools. Everyone can see they are headed for disaster but themselves.

      Tad

  5. Lookalike
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:52 am | Permalink

    Here we have Raab again talking about future relationships with them. It should be spelled out to him that we did not vote for future relationships- we voted to leave- that’s all

    • Richard
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:38 pm | Permalink

      And worryingly for the 21 month vassal state period, the ECJ/Brussels now considers all 28 member states to be “tweet democracies”: https://facts4eu.org/news_octc_2018.shtml#pol

      • Denis Cooper
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 8:50 am | Permalink

        Moved on from Norway’s “fax democracy”, then!

  6. WeToldYou_No_EU
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    Your average (previously loyal) Tory voter out here…just looks on in horror…as the Brexit car crash happens.

    Saboteur Theresa May has played a ‘blinder’ for her EU Masters.

    I shall write once again today, to my MP (Jeremy Hunt!), confirming I have ‘No Confidence’ in Theresa May, or her Cabinet, and obviously my own MP.

    A March in London, by 700,000 (Organisers’ Own Estimate!) of May’s ‘Remainer’ brethren must have been a joy to watch for her yesterday.

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:14 pm | Permalink

      Ask why he did nothing to reform the NHS for all those years. All he did was endlessly apologise for the dire NHS! Did he think that was all he had to do in his job as Health Minister?

      • Mark B
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 10:43 am | Permalink

        LL

        You cannot easily reform an institution, especially when that institution only exists for the benefit of its employees – witness the BBC.

        The ONLY way, is through competition. That is why I support people who can afford private healthcare, or companies offering it, should no have it treated as a benefit.

        Make the NHS and the BBC compete for my money.

        • Lifelogic
          Posted October 23, 2018 at 4:59 am | Permalink

          Indeed.

    • Richard
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:23 pm | Permalink

      One keen Brexiteer used mapchecking.com to estimate the crowd size as around 130,000. https://order-order.com/2018/10/21/suella-uk-can-thrive-no-deal/#comment-4155353888 (scroll down)

      Also anecdotally, Irish, Spanish and other non-voters appeared on youtube.

  7. Peter
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:54 am | Permalink

    May paid lip service to ‘No Deal is better than a bad deal’. We know she is secretive and deceitful.

    The fighting has started in earnest. May under attack from all sides. One of her few supporters claiming Brexiteers have left it too late and should have moved against her earlier. We will see in due course.

  8. G Wilson
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:55 am | Permalink

    May has said a lot of things.

    Unfortunately, she has proven that her word cannot be trusted.

  9. Duncan
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Leave MPs from all sides must work together to bring down the mendacious May. She’s not a Tory PM but a EU technocrat whose only aim is the circumvention of British democracy. We’ve seen this autocratic dynamic at work in Italy a few months ago and now we’re seeing it in the UK.

    May and her team are working closely together with the EU to destroy Redwood and people like him.

    Eurosceptics have waited since 1973 for this opportunity to return the UK to its original sovereign state. Don’t waste it.

  10. Derek Henry
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:04 am | Permalink

    The whole thing has a Tony Blair stink about it.

  11. formula57
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:12 am | Permalink

    It is scandalous that any sort of reminder should be needed.

    The betrayed and spurned electorate will not need reminding when next solicited for votes.

  12. Bob
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:30 am | Permalink

    “Mrs May’s 2017 Election Conservative Manifesto said only sign a Withdrawal Agreement if there is a good Future Partnership Agreement as well”

    That was never the intention, she lied.
    As I have explained to you many times, her mission is to obfuscate and delay Brexit while Brussels works overtime with their agents in the UK to undermine it. We get the Project Fear style chicanery every day as soon as the radio go on in the morning, drip, drip, drip.

    Why do you think the govt never debunks any of the scare stories? In fact they’ve even been proved to be behind some of them.

    I remember seeing Mrs Thatcher leaving No.10 in tears after Europhile fanatics in her own party stabbed her in the back. The Tory EU-skeptics don’t seem to have sufficient support in the party to replace Mrs May with someone prepared to deliver on their manifesto. That’s why I no longer vote for Tories, they trade under a false prospectus.

  13. JOHN FINN
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:36 am | Permalink

    John

    I think there needs to be a sustained Leave campaign to explain the consequences of trading under on WTO terms. We are constantly being bombarded with phrases which include “chaos”, “crashing out”, …. blah blah. I’ve heard them repeated several times this morning on the local politics programme. Even some leave supporters seem to be falling for it and it’s clearly seeping through.

    As you have made clear, there is no good reason why there shoud be delays at ports once we leave the EU but this argument is not being heard.

  14. Mick
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    I think you should copy and paste this article then send it to the sourbry & Wollaston women in your party just to remind them what they got voted in for, Muppets

  15. Adam
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:43 am | Permalink

    Theresa May’s decision to seek increased support by activating the last General Election made sense, but her crazy elements within the Conservative manifesto didn’t.

    A sensible manifesto would have prevented the present chaos, & delivered her as a strong Conservative PM. She misjudged the situation then, & has continued to avoid the straight path to better since. She had several opportunities to match the high qualities of Margaret Thatcher but repeatedly failed.

    We have waited patiently for a higher performer to replace her. The solution is overdue. Please act now.

  16. Duncan
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:55 am | Permalink

    Get us out of the EU before we are imprisoned by this filthy organisation –

    Camilla Tominey, Associate Editor

    19 October 2018 • 9:11pm

    The European Union is drawing up plans to control Britain’s tax policies ­after Brexit, leaked documents seen by The Daily Telegraph disclose.

    According to draft documents, the EU wants to ensure the UK pledges to keep its tax rules aligned with those of the bloc as part of any future Brexit agreement.

    Such a move would prevent the UK from becoming a low-tax economy by cutting its corporation tax rate to attract business. And – depending on the wording of any agreement – it could mean that any future changes to the EU’s tax rules would need to be followed by the UK, even years after Brexit.

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2018/10/19/revealed-eus-attempt-control-britains-tax-policies-brexit/

    • Lifelogic
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:18 pm | Permalink

      Indeed we have suffered far too much taxation already from Major, Brown, Darling, Osborne and Hammond thanks. It is hugely damaging to living standards and our ability to compete.

      • John C.
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

        I have just paid an air fare of £78, of which £65 was tax. I paid it out of taxed income. We are just state slaves.

    • Richard
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:23 pm | Permalink

      Brussels takes full advantage ofMrs May’s consistent “Doormat Strategy”(aiming to throw away all her strongest cards for the benefit of her beloved EU Empire) by using …a Columbo Strategy (and just one last thing…!)

      And: “Brussels has decreed that all EU countries should stop changing the clock back in the autumn and forward in the spring to account for the decline in daylight during the winter months. Under the arrangements set out in the Brexit Withdrawal Act, the UK would be obliged to follow this policy during a transition period until the end of 2020 and possibly longer.” https://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2018/10/21/britain-should-allowed-decide-clocks-change/

      And GDPR and the 5th data ‘freedom’: https://facts4eu.org/news_oct_2018.shtml#5f

      At this rate it will soon be 2025 and Brussels will be demanding that we join the Euro, as required! https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/807762/Eurozone-Brussels-Hungary-Poland-Czech-Republic-Croatia-Romania-Bulgaria

  17. Dennis
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:30 am | Permalink

    After more than 2 years there is still disagreement on whether the UK has legal commitments to pay the £39 bn as said by T. May and others who say there is no legal commitment to pay anything!

    If this simple question cannot be answered in 2 years what hope for any other answers about anything?

  18. Helen Smith
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:35 am | Permalink

    GET HER OUT. With all due respect for the sake of the country, democracy and the party she has to be removed and someone like DD installed.

    I would love Boris in, or JRM, or your good self but the likes of Soubry, not a Conservative, wouldn’t accept that and would make trouble.

    DD has already worked up a deal and is abreast of everything.

    Please, get your letter in today.

    • rose
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

      Was DD abreast of the Backstab?

  19. Steve
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    I agree JR. But of course we’ve come to expect lies, capitulations and u-turns from this government.

    I suspect they’ll sign at the eleventh hour while feeding us much bull’s poop, then make a run for it.

  20. WeToldYou_No_EU
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 12:42 pm | Permalink

    Since the vote to Leave, the UK has seen just how nasty the EU Leaders really are.

    The EU is a dreadfully outdated, 1950’s Style, Cabal…a Phoenix that rose up from the Ashes of the Eastern European Bloc…an anachronistic relic of an Organisation…run by Unelected, and bullying Dinosaurs.

    In the 2016 Referendum…Remainers didn’t realise what they were voting for!

    • Steve
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 2:59 pm | Permalink

      WTYNWE

      “In the 2016 Referendum…Remainers didn’t realise what they were voting for!”

      What do you expect ? most of ’em had a Politically Correct European education. Besides having an IQ of about 2, they’re brainwashed to believe anything to do with sovereignty, free will and democracy are bad things.

      They’re also terribly naive as a consequence. They think if they pull off the most serious betrayal in British history they’ll get away with it.

    • Helen Smith
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 6:50 pm | Permalink

      Ain’t that the truth!

    • L Jones
      Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

      And yet STILL remainers think we should remain shackled. Why?
      Can it really be because they are confusing ”Europe” with ”EU”? Are they really so ill-informed and poorly educated?
      If so, it doesn’t bode well for our future generations.

  21. John Hatfield
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    “This surely means we cannot sign the Withdrawal Agreement they propose.”
    It seems to me John, that the Establishment can do much as it likes.

  22. Mick
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:00 pm | Permalink

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1034425/brexit-news-second-referendum-eu-peoples-march-whitehall-plans-theresa-may-latest
    Are they mad or what, this would be the total end of democracy in this country and would surely cause civil unrest, then there’s the other issue of Scotland do they think for one minute that the SNP would not be shouting from the highest rampart of Edinburgh castle for another independence referendum , you can bet your bottom dollar they would , the only way out of this is to ditch Mrs May and replace her with a true Brexiteer like Mr Johnson or Mr Davis

  23. Roy Grainger
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:11 pm | Permalink

    We know what she said John. We also know that you can’t believe a single word she says.

  24. miami.mode
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:18 pm | Permalink

    During the euro crisis in the early 2010s a respected columnist in a national newspaper wrote that you should never underestimate the misery the EU Commission would inflict on millions of their citizens in order to ensure their project advanced the way they wanted.

    This has been proved in various ways and means that they will be completely intransigent in their negotiations with us. Given the chance, they will trample all over us if only ‘pour encourager les autres’ to not even consider going down the same route.

  25. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:20 pm | Permalink

    The EU pretends that until the UK has actually left legally it cannot negotiate a trade deal to apply after the UK has left, and rather than saying “What nonsense!” and making sure the rest of the world also saw that it was complete nonsense our Prime Minister supinely agreed with the EU’s pseudo-legalistic argument. Which is what she always does, her primary loyalty is still to the EU and so if she can get away with it she submits to whatever it says.

    • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:19 pm | Permalink

      @Denis Cooper: I don’t think that is completely correct. If negotiations had been more efficient and the Uk had signed the “orderly withdrawal” agreement, say in December 2017, and the whole of 2018 would have been spent on hammering out the future relation. If you look back, you’ll see that the UK needed much time before coming with clear positions, and even now there are questionmarks what the “United” Kingdom really wants as a whole. Realising that a more vage agreement on the future relation was agreed between the negotiators, for which they first had to convince some of the EU27.

    • Richard
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

      Mrs May has stated in Parliament several times that legally it cannot negotiate a trade deal to apply after the UK has left.
      However, that was not David Davis’ understanding who was expecting to send lots of negotiators to Brussesls.
      And this tweet by a privileged FT journalist at the 20 Oct meeting is quite illuminating: https://twitter.com/alexebarker/status/921426522715471872 “16/ One is for divorce talks to continue in parallel with the EU’s prep work on transition/trade. By Dec [2017], the two sides could jump at once”.

      That thread illustrates that if Mrs May hadn’t been so helpful then the EU were happy to accept less.

      • Richard
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 11:51 pm | Permalink

        * to apply UNTIL after the UK has left

      • L Jones
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:26 pm | Permalink

        The words ”EU” and ”happy” don’t sit well together.

        • Richard
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:28 pm | Permalink

          Ok poor words, my point was that Brussels wants a deal. EU farmers & other EU exporters represent irresistible pressure for one.

  26. Peter VAN LEEUWEN
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:29 pm | Permalink

    Does it make much difference for me whether the UK signs the withdrawal agreement?

    Of course I believe that the UK would best be a content part of the EU.
    For that ever to happen however, it may be better to first spend time outside the EU.

    See if the nostalgic aching for the re-emergence of greatness will happen or not.

    * If it does – congratulations – and live your dream of global greatness.

    * If it doesn’t, there is a chance that the UK will have its humble pie and eat it, realising that it is a European country just like all the others, no more need for specialness. In that case the UK may enter into associated membership or full membership.

    In all scenarios “trade there will always be”, no blockades punishments, or favoritism.

    • Steve
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

      PvL

      Dream on son.

      ….and it seems I have to tell you again; the UK is NOT a European country. For one thing it’s an island.

      And for another it’s a sovereign island, NOT an EU province.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 8:47 pm | Permalink

        @Steve: Islands are usually packed together with a continent (or country, the Netherlands has several islands).
        Not a European country? More an American country?

        • Steve
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 5:33 pm | Permalink

          PvL

          “Not a European country? More an American country?”

          Do you have a problem with that? If so: hard luck.

        • L Jones
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:29 pm | Permalink

          Tosh, Peter. Perhaps a little more geographical knowledge is needed here?

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:55 am | Permalink

        Steve,

        A big part of Denmark are islands as well which are not linked to the European continent but Denmark is still par of Europe and therefore a European country , so stop your false interpretations

        • Steve
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 5:25 pm | Permalink

          HCI

          The islands are Danish protectorates, Denmark is part of Europe geographically.

          The UK on the other hand is not geographically part of Europe, and is a sovereign island.

          What don’t you understand about that?

          See that’s the trouble with the EU, they think if it’s in the same hemisphere it should be under EU rule.

    • Timaction
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:41 pm | Permalink

      What added value does the EU give us other than costs, regulation, mass migration? Why don’t you go worry about Dutch control by your EU masters!

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 9:51 pm | Permalink

        @Timaction: Ask your young people of whom 75% voted remain.
        Ask your well-educated Britons, most of whom voted remain.

        • Edward2
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:42 am | Permalink

          How can it be 75%?
          Of the young people eligible to vote only 36% actually bothered to cast their vote.

          • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
            Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:31 am | Permalink

            @Edward2: You can do better than such a poor argument, can’t you?
            Or are you making the analogue suggestion that only 17mn out of 46mn eligible voters voted to leave?

          • hans christian ivers
            Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:56 am | Permalink

            Erward 2

            It could be 75% of the 36%, if you thought it through?

          • Edward2
            Posted October 22, 2018 at 5:50 pm | Permalink

            Peter
            I have made a perfectly valid argument.
            Your claim of 75% is incorrect.
            No amount of your sarcasm and odd comments will alter that.
            Hans
            Indeed that is about the right figure
            But it isn’t what Peter claimed
            Perhaps you might explain it to your pal.

        • L Jones
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:35 pm | Permalink

          ”Well-educated Britons”? How unforgivably patronising is that? Coming from someone whose comments certainly leave a lot to be desired in the ”educated” department, that is a very questionable remark. Upon what, exactly, do you base your assertion? We are well aware that our young people are not being educated to the standard they should be, courtesy of EU inculcations.
          ”Most of whom voted to remain” – on what do you base this? I am aware that nearly all the people I know, highly educated, professional people, voted to leave the EU for the very reasons expressed here so eloquently.
          You should be a tad more respectful of your host and his commenters.

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:59 am | Permalink

        Timeaction,

        Not a particularly useful nor intelligent manner to respond. I am sure you can do much better than that?

        • Timaction
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:48 pm | Permalink

          Please note that Mr EU didn’t answer but deflected. My IQ has been independently assessed and is more than adequate!!!

    • A.Sedgwick
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

      Blood, toil, tears and sweat used to be our forte, hopefully it still is.

    • Richard1
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 4:21 pm | Permalink

      I do not think there is any nostalgia. The main argument for Brexit is a desire to be able to elect and get rid of, in elections, the people who make the laws under which we live. This is increasingly difficult given more and more law comes from the EU. The apparent difficulty of leaving shows the extent to which the UK has become a subordinate part of the EU. There is also a fundamental difference between the UK & most if not all other EU states, namely that trade with the EU, whilst important, is proportionally less so for the UK. 13% of GDP I think.

      The other bizarre thing is that even at this late stage we still hear no coherent arguments for remain. It’s all either derogatory comments about the people who voted for Brexit, as you have made and M Barnier just did, or ridiculous and incredible scare stories about a trade embargo by the EU leading to shortages of food and medicines . No-one in the UK – really no-one – is making arguments as to why the Euro, the Schengen Agreement, free movement, the CAP, the CFP etc are policies we should want. It’s very odd.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 21, 2018 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

        @Richard1:
        * I’ve not come across people who are so unhappy about the countrymen/women they elected into office as I see in Britain.
        * Laws from “the EU”are laws that you made in cooperation with others from 27 countries. I’ve always found it curious that the Britons think the EU is some foreign occupying power. Good reason for me to wish you to leave, as understanding about the EU is so sorely lacking.
        * Arguments why various aspects EU aspects are a good thing I indeed hardly ever read in British. Most Dutch people couldn’t even imagine living without e.g. Schengen. The euro is a convenience, just like having no borders.
        * Having a single market, very good health and safety standards, good cooperation in judicial matters, a common approach for cross border policies like on climate change, the free mobile-roaming, ability to work in any EU country, are all advantages as I see them.
        * As a block the EU will get better trade deals than you will, but that still has to be shown in practice.

        • Richard1
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 6:03 pm | Permalink

          I’m not sure you’re right:-

          – approval levels for the goats eg of France and Germany are below even Mrs May’s and establishment centre left and right parties are collapsing in support around Europe
          – you’re right these laws are made in cooperation, the problem is if you want them changed, as many do in the UK you can’t for exactly that reason. You can’t vote out the EU establishment. There is no opposition to ever closer union t the EU level, and very little scrutiny or debate on the policies
          – you’re right the UK press is by and large negative on the EU and the good aspects don’t get a hearing. Fine if the people of the Neths want wants the Euro and Schengen – indeed there are conveniences to both – but the people of the UK clearly don’t and these are fundamental EU policies
          – the EU isn’t the only region of the world to have good product and environmental standards not competitive roaming rates. Often these things are to be welcomed but let them be introduced by mutual cooperation not supranational govt
          – I do t think you’re right on trade deals. One country doesn’t do another a favour by signing a trade deal, its mutually beneficial. The EUs protectionism in a number off areas, such as agriculture, and insistence on harmonisation rather than mutual recognition is an impediment to the best modern, inflexible trade deals.

    • Anonymous
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 6:21 pm | Permalink

      Is there not a shred of “Perhaps we may have got some things wrong.” from the EU ?

      After all, it’s not just in Britain. Many countries in the EU now have mainstream anti EU parties.

      • Peter VAN LEEUWEN
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:36 am | Permalink

        @Anonymous: That is called democracy. National policies have become more europeanised and European policies have become more national – as such people care moe about EUrope, in favor or against.
        Ant-EU parties are rare, strong eurosceptic parties – yes they have become more mainstream.

        • L Jones
          Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:38 pm | Permalink

          So why not let the people have a say in a referendum in each of those countries, then, Peter? Just to make sure the EU knows they are all on side, of course.

      • hans christian ivers
        Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:57 am | Permalink

        yes but they still do not have a wish to vote to leave Denmark being a good example

  27. piglet
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    Yes, well good luck with that one, John. I quite agree with you, but you can be sure the PM, most of the Government and the entire Civil Service won’t. Failure to come to an agreement is a shocking failure of diplomacy as far as the mandarins are concerned. They would rather keep talking into the early hours in order that a joint text can be agreed and the negotiations can be declared a success … however bad the agreement is for us. Likewise, the media seems to consider failing to agree a deal tantamount to precipitating WW3.

  28. Denis Cooper
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 1:51 pm | Permalink

    Somewhat off topic, I’ve just witnessed an abundance of meaningless verbiage from both Keir Starmer and Dominic Raab on the Andrew Marr programme, and in fact the most interesting part was Tony Connelly, Europe Editor for the Irish RTE, saying at 6 minutes in:

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0bpz6bp/the-andrew-marr-show-21102018#

    “Northern Ireland would stay in the customs union and single market for goods if nothing better came along to remove any need for checks on the Irish border”.

    So who would now need, or just want, to restore any checks on goods crossing the Irish border, when routine checks on goods crossing the Irish border were abandoned at the start of 1993 with the inception of the EU single market?

    The UK government has already said that it does not intend to reinstate any checks on goods crossing the border into Northern Ireland; and why after a quarter of a century of trusting that on the whole goods coming from the Irish Republic will sufficiently conform to EU standards to make it unnecessary to intercept and inspect them at the border why should the UK government change its policy and start checking them?

    Perhaps some way in the future the UK might become concerned that EU standards on some goods are not high enough, but we can cross that bridge when we come to it.

    So it comes down to the question:

    “Why should the EU and the Irish authorities feel that they should reinstate border checks on goods coming in from Northern Ireland, unless Northern Ireland remained under the rules of the EU customs union and single market for goods?”

    The answer is that a new UK law to prohibit the export to the Republic of any goods which the EU would regard as illicit could do the job just as well as an existing UK law to prohibit the importation, production and circulation of those goods within Northern Ireland.

    • Steve
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 2:39 pm | Permalink

      Dennis

      “Tony Connelly, Europe Editor for the Irish RTE, saying at 6 minutes in: “Northern Ireland would stay in the customs union and single market for goods if nothing better came along to remove any need for checks on the Irish border”.

      Oh yeah, and who does he think he is ?

    • Timaction
      Posted October 21, 2018 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

      It’s a contrived problem by Treason/Olly and their Federalist EU buddies to keep us in by false pretences!

  29. Alan Jutson
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    Seems like my last comment failed moderation, I know not why.

    Crunch time this week For Mrs May we are informed by the Press this morning.

    Mrs May’s time should be up as her actions speak much louder than her words.

    She should therefore be judged on her actions and performance to date.

    My only hope is that the person who replaces her, gets their act together quickly and can build a team that will honour the referendum, and introduce rather more (small c) traditional type Conservative policies and values.

  30. Iain Gill
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 4:05 pm | Permalink

    The last several manifestos have said immigration down to the tens of thousands too… No sign of taking that promise seriously either.

  31. Robin Wilcox
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 5:13 pm | Permalink

    I expect Mrs May to honour the manifesto. If she cannot do that she needs to step down.

  32. margaret
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    “How the worm hath turned.”

  33. Ron Olden
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 6:26 pm | Permalink

    John Redwood’s comments are statements of fact and are the real reason why there was No Deal last week.

    Mrs May can’t expect Parliament to vote for a Withdrawal Agreement until we know what we’re getting in return.

    Both sides Negotiators’ Declaration TF50 (2017) issued on December 8th 2017 makes the point of saying that everything substantive has to be agreed at once.

    Para 5 says:-

    ”Under the caveat that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed, the joint commitments set out below in this joint report shall be reflected in the Withdrawal Agreement in full detail.

    This does not prejudge any adaptations that might be appropriate in case transitional arrangements were to be agreed in the second phase of the negotiations, and is without prejudice to discussions on the framework of the future relationship”.

    https://ec.europa.eu/commission/sites/beta-political/files/joint_report.pdf

    • Peter D Gardner
      Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:46 pm | Permalink

      It is arguable that inclusion of the backstop in the withdrawal agreement does not comply with Article 50 because it does not take “account of the framework for its [UK’s] future relationship with the Union”.
      In fact, this provision in Article 50 renders the entire Withdrawal Agreement invalid. Certainly, the proper place for any backstop is not in withdrawal arrangements but in the future relationship. It should simply be deleted from the Withdrawal Agreement and an agreement on border arrangements from 30 March 2019 substituted.

  34. Iain Gill
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 8:05 pm | Permalink

    may must go

  35. Gary C
    Posted October 21, 2018 at 8:33 pm | Permalink

    John, while you say “It might be helpful to remind the PM and others of what the Manifesto said” there is a massive problem there as they are not listening.

    Support for the Conservatives is shrinking faster than a woollen sweater on a hot wash!

  36. Yossarion
    Posted October 22, 2018 at 8:51 am | Permalink

    So Mother Teresa once again say’s trust in Me, some may have been Hypnotized by her KAA like snake skin shoes but sooner or later even a devout Tory MP must be able to see through those lying eyes.

  37. Javelin
    Posted October 22, 2018 at 9:49 am | Permalink

    Power is the proportionality of the input effort and output results.

    By which definition the greatest power of Theresa May is to ignore democracy and destroy the Conservative Party to satisfy her ego by the civil servants surrounding her.

  38. mancunius
    Posted October 22, 2018 at 11:52 am | Permalink

    JR – We have already seen plainly – since 8 December 2017 – that Theresa May has wiped out all vestiges of the 2017 Conservative Election Manifesto, and of her Lancaster House speech’s policy statement.
    Now she aims to hobble Britain with promises to harmonise our taxes with the EU. I know of no Free Trade Agreement that does that. It is effectively remaining lock stock and barrel in the Imperial German Zollverein.
    Very useful for Germany. Poison for this country.

    Dump her now.

  39. Peter D Gardner
    Posted October 22, 2018 at 7:36 pm | Permalink

    Congratulations on your passionate intervention in Parliament. It is clear to me that since taking personal charge of the negotiations Mrs May has gone feral and become a supra-nationalist. It is clear she is now determined to keep UK under the supra-nationalist government of the EU for as long as she can get away with and to the greatest extent she can get away with. That is why the shape of the agreements is of secondary importance. She sees no value in the sovereign independent nation state. Her socialist leanings are self-evident. Why is she leader of the Conservatives?
    It should now be abundantly clear that Brexit will never be delivered while Mrs May resides in 10 Downing Street. In Westminster she is winning. In Brussels she is on the side of supra-nationalist government for UK. She is a natural technocrat and is at home with the EU’s approach to government.
    It is worth the risk of a Corbyn government save UK from vassalage which would last a generation or more – real damage from which a democratic self-governing UK might never re-emerge. A Corbyn government would not last more than a few years and UK would recover.
    Mrs May must be thrown out. She is not on the side of UK.

  40. Barbara
    Posted October 23, 2018 at 8:45 am | Permalink

    My faith in our politicians and the system is totally shot . One of the few to shine through this miasma of decepit and obfuscation (and downright lying ) ,with integrity is you , Sir , ( John Redwood ). I have just renewed my membership ( God knows why ) and live in eternal hope that the duplicitous (or stupid )May and her remain cohorts are turned from their current path or that she is removed and a true Brexiteer takes the lead and gets us out of this political entanglement in a clean fashion.
    Politics will never be the same , trust is gone and its going to be an uphill struggle for it to be redeemed.
    Thank you John Redwood for your consistency and good sense .

  41. Simon
    Posted October 23, 2018 at 8:48 pm | Permalink

    What Theresa May “believes” is neither here nor there. She uses that type of language to disguise the vacuous nonsense of her policies. Article 50 is quite clear. A fact you seem to deny.

  • About John Redwood


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

  • John’s Books

  • Email Alerts

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

    Enter your email address:

    Delivered by FeedBurner

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

  • Map of Visitors

    Locations of visitors to this page