Here are two sample letters (actually, emails) sent to MPs which we publish in the hope that readers will use the weekend and email their own MPs. The first sample is by our star correspondent Roger Arthur, who wrote to me:
You might ask, is it worth lobbying your MP to vote down TMay’s flawed WA proposal? Well lobbying did work in 2013 when many successfully urged their MPs to vote against the Cameron/Obama proposal to attack Syria.
Her proposal will not pass next week, if enough Tory MPs vote against it. Labour has set acceptance criteria which are almost impossible to meet and they will hope to engineer a GE, by voting against her proposal.
She continues to try to save face, by putting us in fear of another referendum and then no Brexit, while suggesting that the immediate transition to no deal cannot be contemplated, when it clearly can.
So her (and the EU’s) bluff needs to be called. We voted to leave the EU, not to be left half in. On that basis, I am sending the email below to the local MP.
The EU hopes to use her proposal to string us along, long enough to see an even more compliant set of Quisings elected in the UK, who will negotiate a return to enslavement by the EU. So for many reasons, we need a clean break and we need it now.
Let no one say that we left our MPs in any doubt about the instructions that they have been given. To send an email to yours, try using format: email@example.com
Below is the email that I am about to send to the local MP. You could repeat promises made by Cameron here. Good luck.
408 constituencies voted to leave the EU, but continuing to comply with the EU rulebook, paying £39 billion for the privilege, would not mean leaving – by any stretch of the imagination. To recap:
Your communique dated January 2013 made clear that when an EU referendum is held then “it is the people who will decide” and your commitment mirrored promises made by David Cameron.
Then 544 MPs (84%) voted for a referendum and 408 (63%) constituencies voted to leave the EU, with a 72% turnout – a bigger mandate than any government ever had – and your 2017 party manifesto undertook to respect the referendum outcome.
Clearly the instruction from the sovereign people to Parliament, was to leave the EU, not to remain half in.
Indeed, the British people have never voted for their Parliament to be emasculated although that has been the EU agenda for many years and we need a clean break from them now. By voting for the PM’s proposal, you would be facilitating that agenda.
As you know, EU leaders are not interested in referendum outcomes and they will do all that they can to prevent the UK from becoming more independent and competitive, by offloading the cost of compliance with their regulations. We should leave them with NO scope to do that.
The cost of such compliance was estimated by Gordon Brown (in 2005) and others at around 7% of GDP, ie around £150 billion pa. That is despite the fact that over 90% of UK companies don’t even export to the Single Market.
Just add two years of that to the £39bn, plus emerging tariff gains and it is clear that there is absolutely no business case for further delay to Brexit and for anything other than a clean break.
Without such a break the UK could continue to carry large financial liabilities in event of a Eurozone crash. That is yet another good reason NOT to kick the can down the road, for another 2 to 3 years. If we are going to have a confrontation, then let us have it now.
In summary, the only option which would respect the referendum outcome, avoiding needless cost and risk, is a no deal exit on WTO terms and Parliament has no mandate to do anything else.
So I urge you to truly respect your instruction from the referendum to LEAVE the EU, by voting against the PM’s flawed WA proposal – because with or without the NI backstop, it is not fit for purpose. A vote for that proposal would be to betray the sovereign people and democracy itself.
YS, Roger Arthur
The other sample email is by Debbie LeMay who sent me this email today:
I intend to send the e-mail below to all MPs before next week’s vote. They won’t read it, of course, but it’ll clog up their mail boxes. Brexit Central is also urging its members to write to their MPs:
“The Prime Minister’s Withdrawal Agreement is fundamentally flawed in that there is a huge groundswell against the so-called ‘backstop’ regarding Northern Ireland, which gives the EU a right of veto over the protocol.
But this is not the only problem with the WA. Even if the backstop clause were to be removed, there remain several other clauses which would make the WA unacceptable.
According to Professor David Blake of Cass Business School the agreement was drafted by European Commission lawyers with the aim of permanently trapping the UK as a satellite of the European Union, with no right to vote on or veto laws passed by the European Parliament that we will then have to obey, and no right to unilaterally exit from the treaty that ratifies the Agreement.
The European Commission made clear at the beginning of the “negotiations” that they would only agree to a bad deal that was worse than continued membership of the EU. All the other leaders of the remaining 27 member states know that this is a bad deal for us – which is why they all eagerly signed it.
Top lawyers and businessmen have picked the agreement apart and have identified its flaws. Martin Howe QC, chair of Lawyers for Britain, claims the WA “throws away in advance our two strongest negotiation cards: EU budget payments of £39 billion and the future access to our market for EU goods”.
And Graeme Leach, a member of Economists for Free Trade, points out that “the draft withdrawal agreement will prevent us from signing free trade deals with third-party countries – again, unless the EU agrees its own free trade deal with us, which releases us from any backstop obligations. Forget deals with the US, China, and India.”
The most alarming facts have been identified by Sir Richard Dearlove, former head of MI6, and Major General Julian Thompson, the Falklands War veteran. They argue that “the ‘deal’ surrenders British national security by subordinating UK defence forces to Military EU control”. It has been discovered that Mrs May has already signed up the UK to EU defence institutions meaning continued vast annual payments to Brussels, giving away control over major aspects of defence and foreign policy. All this has the power to undermine NATO as the US could no longer rely on us.
There is only one way we can break away from the EU cleanly and that is to trade under WTO rules, which many businesses are using already. Defeatist terms such as ‘crashing out’ and ‘no deal’ don’t tell the story of a successful Britain trading with the world under well-established rules.
I urge you most strongly to vote against Mrs May’s Withdrawal Agreement.
YS, Debbie LeMay
Please email your MP this weekend. They need reminding that they work for us, and as Debbie wrote, even if they don’t read them: the mass of ‘incoming’ will certainly be noticed.