Today’s letters address the question of Brexit, what needs to be done, and why. The first letter is by our contributor and reader Roger Turner:
Let me tell you a true story.
Once upon a time, there was a company that sold Orthopaedic Beds, perhaps some of you will be familiar with this firm – solid (some say) sleeping provision, supposedly designed as an aid for those with back troubles. The firm employed a team of “specialists”; actually they are a team of specialist parrots who have been taught a standard “pitch”, which they babble when they visit the “sufferer’s” home where they will offer their “informed” advice as to how the client has been so wise to suss out his problem and come to them and “yes! He is quite correct his/her bed is obviously of no help to the condition, in fact it is probably contributing to it”. The next step is the command “Take me to your bed!”
Followed by the viewing and the advice …: “Oh Yes!, this is obviously the source of your trouble, before your new bed arrives, you would be even better off moving the mattress to the floor and sleeping there – would you like me to help you do this now?”
The above manoeuvre is known in the trade as “Killing the Bed”. Why am I writing this here? Because I see Brexit and UKIP`s part in the operation as the “sale” of a product.
As in the tale of the bed above, the voter is suffering from the wicked machinations of his government and their masters, the EU.
UKIP is offering their “product” “Brexit”; the voter is aware he is suffering, he knows he is being got at, traduced, misled, lied to, robbed blind even, but the process is so insidious and comprehensive that he has no idea of how it all interlocks and hangs together, indeed he is so overwhelmed that he is incoherent and insensible so as to be unable to comprehend this morass of hurt and assault on his mentality. To be able to achieve a total and comprehensive Brexit, UKIP, must, in effect “Kill the EU”.To do this the case must be made to expose every aspect (or at least the salient ones) of the EU`s wrongdoing. I feel, not only does the voter not know what will be the advantages of leaving the EU, I don`t think many of them have a grasp of the WHY:
WHY do we want to control our own borders.?
WHY do we want to write our own laws?
WHY do we want our fishing industry back?
WHY do we want to cease to be subservient to the ECHR?
WHY do we want and end to the EAW?
I seem to remember there used to be a column in the Independent “Inside the belly of the beast”, some of the necessary information was gathered there – but it was only available to members – the general population as far as I know have never had a proper resume – without one I don’t think we can get an informed population on our side to “Kill the Beast”.
Respectfully, Roger Turner
The next letter, by our reader Roger Arthur, contains a stark warning:
With County Council Elections due in May, there is a serious risk that members might conclude that the Party’s over, we are going to leave the EU and they can all relax. Nothing could be more dangerous, because Ms May is leading us into an Article 50 trap.
This is indicated in this report, by its principal architect, a former Italian Prime Minister. He apparently claimed that Britain must “lose” when it comes to finances – so they are forced to stay in. He said: Article 50 is meant “to show Britain the error of its ways” and that “the EU had to be ‘especially tough’ in Brexit talks.”
Britain is due to hold national elections in 2020 and Amato said he hoped a UK party promoting a pro-European agenda might win power and put a brake on Brexit plans. For that reason, he said it was important to “stretch out the talks” (Yes read that again and again)
He said: ”I hope that negotiations are dragged on so they won’t be wrapped up by 2020. Ms May “wants to wrap things up by 2019, but it will be easy to prolong matters.”
Ms May could counter that threat by using the Royal Prerogative to denounce the EU treaties, making the 1972 EC Act irrelevant – thereby taking us out of the EU. She should be ready to use that UDI option.
If the Judiciary deems that she is not entitled to use the Royal Prerogative, then EU Treaties are invalid. Why? Because ministers used the same prerogative to sign those treaties.
Either way, Ms May can surely lead us out of the EU, because the Judiciary can’t have it both ways. But instead, she continues to take us into the Article 50 trap, designed by the EU.
As they say, it ain’t over until the (fat) lady sings and so we cannot afford to be complacent and we really do need to hold her feet to the fire. PE teachers advise runners not to slow down when approaching the finishing line – but instead to accelerate towards it. That is what we must surely do. So let’s fight this battle, until we see the whites of her eyes.
Respectfully, Roger Arthur