Evan Davis agrees with Oliver Letwin….the government does have a Brexit plan and it’s very clear and simple…
In which case why do BBC presenters and journalists keep insisting in mocking tones that the government has no plan? The same line that Labour peddles of course.
The plan is simple….to carry out the instruction of the British People and leave the EU…the first issue is to stop the free movement of immigrants…..what naturally follows as a consequence of that is a negotiation on the single market and all that, the outcome of which the government cannot possibly know other than the initial conclusion that to stop free movement means we exit the single market completely….but that is open to negotiation as it may not be in the interest of the EU itself to enforce the letter of the law. The government’s plan therefore is to get the best deal possible, an amorphous, even abstract possibility…and that is not something that can be predicted and written down in detail. So why does the BBC give any credence to Labour’s call for that detail? Such a statement is impossible to give. Labour clearly wants to define Brexit in its own terms…continued membership of the single market and the customs union….which would actually mean we stay in the EU and continue with freedom of movement…hence Brexit is shelved. Where is the BBC’s challenge to Labour’s dishonesty and betrayal of the British People? Labour politicians all too often get away with their glib assurance that they respect the referendum’s outcome and are only seeking a deal that is best for Britain…when that deal is actually one intended to destroy Brexit.
During the referendum campaign I thought that it would be difficult to negotiate everything in the two years allowed by Article 50 and that an interim solution such as EEA membership with a variation on the Norway option could be a good interim solution. I found it hard to understand why Leavers leaders such as Farage and Gove kept pushing the WTO option. Now I understand; they knew that the Remain leaders would never accept the result of the vote and so the break had to be complete.
The persistent efforts, both legal and political, of the Remainers to frustrate Brexit have made it clear that we will have only one opportunity to escape the EU. Any interim stage that we accept in good faith will become the final settlement. If there are future discussions on a change of staus it will be because the oligarchs want to drag us back in. Soft Brexit is a trap that the BBC will campaign for with every means at its disposal.
If the EU is willing to negotiate a free trade agreement so much the better, but we mustn’t make any concessions to get it. Brexit means Leave, with no hidden ties still binding us to the EU.
We might well be forced into armed insurrection.
After watching quite a bit of the debate,I feel more hopeful that we will leave the single market and the customs union .It cannot happen soon enough for me .There doesn’t appear to be any other way to go.Its not in EUs interest to refuse trade with us.
Im sure there will be bumps and hurdles put in place by remainers , they are very sore losers.
I didnt hear one coherent argument for positive reasons to stay in the EU .Its all about Ideology.
I think the British people will have the last word ,its called a general election.
Radio 5 Live news today at 05:00 hrs made no mention of the Brexit vote and the only mention of Brexit was that some banks are planning to leave UK for Paris. They don’t like it up em.
Peter Bone is increasingly emerging as a clear and concise spokesperson for reason. I like his no nonsense counters to the remainers’ BS. And I particularly liked his question in yesterday’s PMQs.
It was amusing and delivered well. But wait, this shouldn’t be a joke. It really should be our default negotiation position. I hope that it will be.
I find it strange that after a referendum which rejected Europe’s unelected liberal elite telling the UK what to do, we are told that we only have 18 months to negotiate, not the 2 years specified in Article 50.
And who is telling us what we can and can’t do? Well it’s those naughty unelected European liberal elites of course.
Thanks for reminding us why we voted to leave.
I still don’t entirely trust Mrs May, but I do admire her somewhat for the idea of the article 50 vote. This has a three-fold effect: 1. It silences the Remainers trying to push for ‘Parliamentary sovereignty’ as a way of blocking Brexit, 2. It scuppers the Supreme Court’s junta show trial and renders it pointless, and 3. It provides an indication of who in the House is in support of Brexit, which could come in very handy should a General Election be called.
It really upsets lawyers when you affirm that the Supreme Court has no business in this matter as it is the people ( in whom all sovereignty is vested) who have made a decision on the instructions of their parliament to do so via a referendum
So simple really and they just do not get it. Just stop listening or arguing with the idiots. In fact tell them to FO.
The day after Parliament overwhelmingly votes for Article 50 by end 3/17 and there is absolutely no mention of it on the BBC news website homepage. None.
There is of course an anti Brexit story about banks moving to Paris, for which the source is a French financial regulator.
Flexdream – thanks for pointing that out. Amazing. The BBC website does mention the vote quite far down on its front page as a ‘what the papers are saying’ item, which suggests a ‘nothing to do with us’ approach.
“The BBC website does mention the vote”
Wouldn’t mind betting that most of those lazy BBC editors/script writers can be seen and heard ranting and raving outside the supreme court in disguise!
And after the Commons vote last night, can the far-Left BBC finally stop parading that raddled old ideologue Ken Clarke as their “Tory-for-balance” panel member for most EU discussions?
He’s called himself out, for all to see. He’s no longer any good to the cause!
Lot of nonsense perpetuated by the Remain campaigners, and no doubt fully supported by the Civil Service Euro Mandarins, on how difficult the Brexit negotiations will be. Had the misfortune of meeting and reviewing ‘work’ performed by these so called hard-working public servants. Usually involved attending endless meetings, where inevitably the only agreed action would be date of the next meeting, (or preferably lunch/dinner/buffet funded by the UK taxpayer). Lack of any sort of agreement or actual results due to petty intransigence, and the need for department leaders to protect and expand their existing tinpot empires.
There is no no need for extended negotiations. Most of the difficulties with previous EU trade negotiations with external parties are around the need for common standards, and having to comply with EU dictated laws, in order to trade with the EU. The UK comply with all of the required rules already. So all that is required is for us to incorporate all existing law into English law (the Great Repeal Act) and then to ask the EU on which areas they wish to impose their penalty tariffs, and how much they are proposing those amounts should be. The UK is quite happy to continue with the status quo. It is the EU which wishes to penalize us for leaving this so called ‘family of nations’. This would expose to even the stupidest of Remainers the malign EU protectionist racket. Our position would be clear, carry on as we are to the benefit of both parties, or respond in kind to EU imposed penalties to the detriment of both parties.
Where are all the difficult negotiations. This is yet another smoke and mirrors phrase used by the Remainers, which includes nearly all of the ‘Establishment’ to get the decision they want. Ably supported by Civil Servants who want to use it as an excuse to take on more useless non-productive staff, make their personal empires ever larger, and ‘justify’ their ridiculously large salaries and pensions.
Don’t forget a favourite tactic of senior civil servants is Negation By Delay .
I remember my father telling me we had the same problems in 1940 and that overcoming the inertia of the bureaucrats was vital to winning the war. It is always the same and needs to be dealt with harshly and quickly.
It’s really the whole of Parliament’s fault, that the majority of citizens just will not trust politicians any more.
The Government normally swans around, ensuring obfuscation is the name of the game, and without even a credible opposition, especially with the defunct Lib Dems ‘split’ (I’d call it just a little tiny tear, they’re hopeless), and with the continual condemnation of fiddling expenses and perks lurking in the background daily, it’s not surprising that Brexiteers chose to leave for the good of the whole community, the Remoaners wanted to stay just for themselves.
I reckon that the next General Election will be such a watershed, that – even for my nearly seventy years (seventy-three in 2020) – I’ll at last have a view which will pave the way for my remaining family. The mistrust issue will bore the pants off them, but at least the scroungers in Whitehall might have learned a lesson by then.
The bBC must be shaking in its boots at the example of Groupthink execution perpetrated by the SNP( Sinn Fein) in last night’s Article 50 vote.
This stunt by the snp will be deeply embarrassing for the majority of Scots who these people have the audacity to say they represent.
Perhaps the bBC who we fund could carry out a detailed analysis of these people to find out which camp they are really in;
1) people who simply detest the UK
2) Closet (Irish)
republicans
3) Numb Nuts
Kay Burley.. SKY news six o’clock first sentence, quote.. ‘Even a child could see the flaws in the government case’.
Nice neutral headline! Que Gina Miller with a five minute interview ( of ‘it’s nothing to do with me wanting to stay fame’ ) and of course no interview of an opposing point of view, how about a sister site ‘Biased SKY’!