Today’s letters are again putting Brexit or ‘BINO’ (Brexit in Name Only) in the spotlight. The first is from our correspondent Mr King who again urges us to write letters to our MPs, especially the Remainer ones:

Sir,

Needless to say, it is vital that we are not considered to remain under ECJ jurisdiction at the end of the so called Transition period and so the Withdrawal Bill must not be compromised. But as seen from this link, Lord Pannick asked “what priority retained EU law will have in domestic law after exit day?” Why would he even need to ask that question?

Because some want to classify retained EU law as primary legislation so that it would most closely reflect its current status in domestic law and would provide “legal continuity and certainty post-exit”!

They may be trying to leave us under ECJ jurisdiction – without time limit – which would not be leaving the EU. Thus a lot may depend on what MPs do when the Lords’ amendments come to Parliament. Hence my view that we must keep challenging remainer MPs, as below:

Dear xxx,

We were told “it is for the people to decide” when 544 MPs voted to hold a referendum. But you seem unable to accept the outcome, although over 400 (60%) out of 650 constituencies voted to leave the EU. That is of serious concern, bearing in mind that:

  1. The British people have NEVER voted for the independence of Parliament to be handed over to a foreign entity.
  2. The 1972 EC Act ran counter to our Constitutional Law, which makes it unlawful.
  3. Lord Kilmuir advised that the1972 European Communities Act (ECA) posed a direct threat to the independence of Parliament.
  4. MPs failed to keep their Oath to the Crown, when the Queen was made an EU citizen, through the Maastricht Treaty.
  5. Any MP who tries to frustrate the removal of the U.K. from ECJ jurisdiction will be failing in their duty to uphold our Constitutional Law and their Oath.

They will be guilty of conspiracy to treason under the Act of Praemuire 1377 which is extant law.

So if you will not support our Constitutional Law and the wishes of the sovereign people above all other considerations, then you would be well advised to resign. In the name of God GO.

Yours faithfully (your name)”

Please make use of this sample letter to write to your MPs.

Respectfully, Mr King

Next, a letter from our reader Mike O’Neill, showing that the tentacles of ‘Remaindom’ reach wider than we can imagine, even into Church publications:

Sir,

From time to time I send a rant to a soi-disant RC journal. The journal is “The Tablet”, a long-established RC weekly publication.

In the past, I’ve criticised some of the content too, being an RC myself. It has published letters ranting against Trump, praising the use of “God’s other name” [allah] and allowed snide comments against UKIP in general articles.

The editorial in the current issue asked the questions to which I respond, but you might find that Taliban Hamlets libraries don’t take the magazine. This is the ‘rant’:

“* A rhetorical question, of course.

Perhaps because 17.4 million citizens [a majority of those voting] actually want it and deliberately voted for it?

* Sovereignty – not a theoretical concept, at all.

Sell out to [say] The Mirror Group and your editorial freedom would remain?

* Irish border issue?

On ‘our’ side of it, we can do what we like, being a ‘sovereign’ nation that is. What happens on the €ire side, that’s up to that government, is it not? Well, perhaps not, as people in Bruxelles might want to dictate to them. Then again, as the majority in Ulster voted to remain in the €U, perhaps they should be asked again if they’d prefer to remain in it, going for ‘ever more €Urope’, by integrating with the Irish republic . . . ?”

I don’t expect to receive a reply from the editor, much less that it would be printed.

Respectfully, Mike O’Neill

Our contributor Alan Wheatley sent in this rather remarkable information. It would seem that the government’s right hands don’t know what the left hands are doing – or perhaps some of them know more than they let on? See for yourselves:

Sir,

I have received a letter, dated March 2018, from HM Revenue and Customs which I am sure will be of interest to all Brexiteers. It reads, in part, as follows.

The New Customs Declaration Service (CDS) …We are replacing … CHIEF [Ed: Customs Handling of Import and Export Freight] with the Customs Declaration Service (CDS). We will begin the phased introduction of CDS from August 2018. …We made the decision to replace CHIEF with CDS before the EU Referendum. However, the CDS will be able to handle any potential increase in the volume of declarations that may result from the UK’s exit from the EU …”

So, I am very reassured that HMRC are on the case, perhaps more by good luck than judgement, but nevertheless this is one area where the Civil Servants have Brexit nicely in hand. I just wish more of their colleagues were doing the same.

Respectfully, Alan Wheatley

Finally, our outstanding correspondent Roger Arthur sent in this highly topical letter, given that the papers are full of accusations of Leave campaign groups ‘overspending’:

Sir

Those concerned about overspending on the referendum campaign should check this report in the Daily Telegraph that the “BBC received £2m in EU funding in run up to referendum”.

Then check the distortions in the £9m leaflet issued by No 10, including the implication that 3m jobs would be at risk, if we voted to leave the EU.

If that is not enough then consider the many £millions in EU subsidies received by NGOs, many of which campaigned to remain.

Then stop looking for reasons to re-run the referendum.

Respectfully, Roger Arthur

Print Friendly, PDF & Email