Dear Mrs Milton,
Once again, our Government has demonstrated what an incoherent shambolic mess it is making of the so-called “Brexit process”. I have to wonder that you can bear to remain a member of a party whose leadership in its various guises over the last 4 years has overseen the descent of our country into this unpalatable morass.
Almost all commentators apart from hard-line Brexiters are agreed that a no-deal Brexit would be extremely damaging to the interests of the United Kingdom, and yet the Government appears to be sleepwalking towards just that outcome. It is the duty of all MPs to look after the interests of their constituents in particular and of the electorate in general. That must mean avoiding a no-deal Brexit. It is therefore utterly depressing to see that 278 members voted against the amended no-deal motion last night. This, to my mind, is a total derogation of duty. Incidentally, I note that you voted against amendment (a) and did not register a vote on the main amended motion. An explanation of your reasoning would be welcome.
How might a no-deal Brexit be avoided?
1)
Mrs May could manage to bludgeon acceptance in
Parliament of her dog’s-dinner of a withdrawal agreement over the next few
days. This would appear to be unlikely but if it happens, no matter how
unedifying the spectacle, so be it. Presumably the EU27 would be willing to
grant a short technical extension to Article 50 to allow necessary legislation
to be put in place.
2)
There is support via an indicative vote in
Parliament for a different deal which has a good chance of EU27 acceptance (so
not the Malthouse plan which is clearly unacceptable) and this persuades the
EU27 to grant a UK request for a long-term extension to Article 50. Pig’s might
fly.
3)
Government agrees that the only way forward is
for the question to be put to the nation – the so-called 2nd referendum.
Again, the EU27 would have to agree to a long-term Article 50 extension. This
is possible but how likely is it?
4)
Revoke Article 50 and suffer the further
divisiveness that would follow.
No Government would wish to face the above options but this Government and the previous incarnations have only themselves to blame.
This ridiculous situation stems from
1)
the calling of a badly formulated referendum to
solve an internal party political problem;
2)
taking the “advice” of 37% of the electorate and
believing it should be applied to the entire nation, no questions asked;
3)
the inadequacies of “Brexit means Brexit” as a
meaningful policy statement in the absence of any idea of what sort of Brexit
the Government should pursue;
4)
the premature invoking of Article 50;
5)
the apparent ignorance and ineptitude of some
MPs and ministers;
6)
the rise of divisive politicking;
7)
the lack of anyone in a position of authority
who could even marginally be considered as a statesperson.
It seems to me that we are a “United” Kingdom in name only. We desperately need to reset the clock, re-establish some sort of connection between Government and the people (Mrs May is wrong to characterise this trust as fragile – it is already broken), and restart the debate about the UK’s position in the World and in Europe. Article 50 must be revoked.
Yours sincerely
Richard Bawden
No comments:
Post a Comment