Sir,

Many Brexiteers voted for Mrs May’s WAB, in fear of not getting Brexit at all, whereas ERG MPs rejected what they recognised as a BRINO  (Brexit in name only).

But neither her WAB nor the PM’s, has a unilateral escape clause and both would leave the U.K. subject to ECJ jurisdiction.

In fact the UK cannot ratify an Article 50 Withdrawal Agreement without an implementing Act of Parliament – and the Government will have no control over amendments tabled by anti-Brexit majorities in both Houses in Westminster.

So there is no case to wait another 2 or 3 years under ECJ jurisdiction (at a cost of many £bn) only to face the same arguments all over again.

Clearly no-deal would be better than a bad deal – as stated in the Tory Manifesto – and by the PM when he undertook to leave the E.U. by 31st October.

If he fails to do that, then many Tory Brexiteers will transfer their votes to the Brexit Party – increasing the risk of a hung Parliament and the reversal of Article 50. The stakes at too high not to go WTO – now.

Respectfully, Roger Arthur

 

~~~   OOO ~~~

 

Sir,

In my view, the main purpose of Letwin’s move is guided by Chomsky’s playbook

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum….”

They are trying to distract the attention of Leavers to, instead of fighting for Brexit, focus their energies on getting Boris’ deal through. While the Remainers can fight for an extension, revocation, 2nd referendum, etc. So the discourse is limited to two outcomes: Boris’ deal, or revoke/extend/2nd ref. Either way, the result is an outcome Remainers are happy with; and no outcome is one Leavers can be happy with. The discourse has been limited to a vigorous debate about only options which all amount to a victory for Remain. By redefining the battlefield, the Remainers are setting up the battle so they have won it before it even starts.

This is a smart move by Remainers. They are calculating that Leavers will not be smart enough to see through this and unite behind fighting for a clean Brexit, which is well within reach now and which is the only winning move on Leavers’ part. Whether Leavers are smart enough to see through this ploy and play the right move, or whether the Remainers’ cynicism about Leavers’ intelligence is correct and their ploy will work, remains to be seen.

Respectfully, Tomasz Slivnik

 

~~~   OOO ~~~

 

Sir,

 

Why does the BBC spend so much time reporting on the fight for democracy in Hong Kong, while ignoring the U.K. battle to remove us from ECJ jurisdiction?

EU rulers have made clear their agenda to end our nation state, but the BBC will never report that.

Why are we forced to continue funding the BBC, so that it can continue with its attempts to condition our minds? Perhaps they should rely more on EU funding.

Respectfully, Mr King

 

~~~   OOO ~~~

 

Sir,

On “Super Saturday”, I ran a Brexit Party stall in Newmarket. I let members of the public put a ball in a bucket, to say whether they trusted Boris or Nigel more on Brexit.

The enclosed photo, I think, speaks volumes. On the day when The Great Boris Brexit Bamboozle was due to peak in Westminster, the PM lost in West Suffolk, by 19 votes to 55.

More scientific polls show us to be on the back foot- but I believe we can successfully push back.

Respectfully, Jeremy Lowe

~~~   OOO ~~~

 

Sir,

I was following the business statement in the HoC today (Thursday) and am hugely disappointed by the cavalier fashion with which the Leader of the House, Jacob Rees-Mogg brushed aside demands for a debate on a law to control fireworks sales because, he said, people should be allowed to have fun.

So they should – but where’s the fun in terrorising countless animals – not just cats and dogs but birds, horses, cattle – and people, especially babies and the elderly? Where’s the fun in people getting themselves injured?

Why can fireworks not have noise levels reduced much further and made less powerful? Why can’t their sale be restricted even further, and why can’t the police prevent illegal firework sales? It’s the same old plea year after year year after year! There have even been petitions before Parliament – but nothing ever happens. Idiots now aim their fireworks directly at cars and people – have we to wait until someone is killed so that ‘lessons will be learned’?

Fireworks in kids’ and youths’ hands are no longer ”fun”, Mr Rees-Mogg – they are now ‘weaponising’ them, but perhaps it’s another case of posh people not being aware of what goes on on council estates while fondly assuming that everybody and their kids behave as well as they do.

Respectfully, Felicia Catto

Print Friendly, PDF & Email