The idea that whether or not MPs vote for PM May’s so-called Deal, which is actually a Treaty – assuming they are even given the chance to do so – is to be conditional or dependent on whether or not Theresa May names her departure date is UTTER LUNACY. Who is PM has nothing whatsoever to do with the central and only relevant question: namely, whether the Treaty terms are advantageous or disadvantageous for the UK’s future.

Remaining in the EU customs union as part of the Back-stop is overshadowing other major problems.

The UK would not regain Sovereignty since Article 4, paragraph 5 says “In the interpretation and application of this Agreement, the United Kingdom’s judicial and administrative authorities shall have due regard to relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union handed down [even] after the end of the transition period. (my insertion of ‘even’ and emboldening).

The UK would already be conceding fishing quotas: a major reason many voted Leave.

Ill-informed MP’s and commentators appear to think the Treaty can be voted through just to get some form of Brexit and then toughen up on negotiations, likening the process to a football club’s campaign to win the Premier League whereby if the team loses too many matches at the start of the season the football club’s Board can change its failing manager and/or trainer as well as any weak players, to redeem the team’s position – which is only possible because each football match is a fresh start, not relying on past performances. This is a completely wrong view of the Brexit process.

The Brexit process is more like a single chess game.  PM May’s Treaty is the equivalent of a chess game’s opening.  If a novice loses many of his major pieces during the opening phase, even a top International Grand Chess Master would be unable to win from such a hopeless position. Agreeing PM May’s Treaty would put the UK in exactly this invidious position with the recent clarifications having no legal force whatsoever because, in reality, they would be so difficult to prove and then enforce within a reasonable time.

Any commentator who recommends this treaty should be passed, and any MP who votes for it will show themselves to be as thick and incompetent as MP’s who have repeatedly voted for the EU originated HS2 £100B Fraud, with a business case based on a tissue of lies, and as useless as MP’s whose constituencies will be devastated by HS2, who have failed to use the Government’s post 2017 GE reduced majority to force the cancellation of HS2 by refusing to vote for any government business until cancellation of HS2 has been confirmed.  The trouble is, I’ve probably covered most MP’s in this paragraph!  However, voting down PM May’s Treaty would be an opportunity for them to partially redeem themselves since voting for HS2 wasn’t a foundation of Brexit in the way that voting for this Treaty would be.

In February 2016, PM “call me Dave” Cameron promised in the House of Commons that should the Referendum vote be to leave, Article 50 would be triggered immediately “as people would rightly expect” and so we should have already left in June last year. The 2017 General Election in which both the Conservative and Labour Parties’ Manifestos promised to implement Brexit by 11pm, 29th March 2019 as the Article 50 letter had by now at last been submitted.  Had the population changed its mind – which polls show it still hasn’t, and indeed more are now in favour of Brexit – we would have seen a landslide victory by the Lib-Dems who were promising to reverse Brexit were instead virtually obliterated.

When a sports match is the best of three games, the winner is the first to two, and so if one player wins the first two games the third isn’t played as the match has already been won – the position we are now in with regard to Leave votes: 2-0 in favour of Leave and thus the idea of a second referendum, a third vote, is farcical.

Returning to reality, as the PM’s Treaty would be detrimental to future Brexit negotiations, MPs must vote it down.  They must further then stop their “Holier than Thou, we know best” shenanigans and do our bidding as expressed by both the Referendum result and 85% voting again for Brexit in the 2017 General Election, which is to leave on 29th March – as many businesses have now planned for – on a WTO basis.

Crucially, MPs should realise that they would have no responsibility whatsoever for enacting a WTO Brexit were it by any chance to go wrong – which it won’t.  We all knew when we voted in 2016 and 2017 that either we would leave with or without a deal and that it takes two to Tango.  In reality, we had observed the EU Leaders’ intransigence from well before the Referendum when PM Cameron tried unsuccessfully to persuade them to reform and so the current impasse is no surprise to the informed.

Anything less than a WTO Brexit on 29th March will be an absolute betrayal of democracy and could have dire direct action consequences, that surely none of us wants but could so easily happen if MPs continue to ignore both democratic Leave votes.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email