Yesterday Theresa May made her long awaited statement as to what she meant when she said "Brexit means Brexit". Some say we have had to wait far too long for an indication as to Britain's position, but surely this is Cameron's fault. He was so convinced that the country would vote to remain in the EU that no preparations had been made by the Civil Service for a possible Brexit vote.
Most of the arguments to date have been over the so-called soft or hard Brexit options, the former appearing to me to be almost the same as remaining a member of the EU under a new name. She made it very clear that we wanted to control Britain’s borders and create an immigration system that “serves the national interest”. And whilst we would like free trade arrangements with the EU, this will not be at the expense of us either having free movement
of people or paying vast sums into the EU coffers. Most importantly, as far as I'm concerned, is the fact that the UK “will take back control of our laws and bring an end to the
jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain”.
She also said that we do not wish to remain in the existing customs union as we would be required to have the common tariffs with the EU which are designed largely to protect various EU producers from world wide competition. She also pointed out that the existing customs union precludes us from negotiating our own trade agreements with other countries.
Most importantly she said that she prefers 'no deal' rather than a 'bad deal'. This, of course is something that Cameron would never have said which was why he got nowhere in his pre-referendum discussions.
Mrs May made it clear that existing EU laws which applied to this country would be enshrined into UK law and any that were no longer required would subsequently be repealed. Whilst this would satisfy those workers who were worried about the possible loss of some rights that they had obtained under the EU, I am sceptical about the subsequent repealing of unwanted rules; no legislation ever seems to get repealed!
She said that she expects co-operation to continue on matters like security and other areas of mutual interest. Surely no one is going to oppose such an idea, although with the EU, who knows?
The Remoaners of course found fault with almost everything that she
said. Clegg announced that he would vote down the deal in Parliament
before talks have even started. So much for democracy, listening to the
debate in Parliament and the electors views, 'No, I will vote it down
regardless'. Tory MP Ken Clarke claimed that Britain could still find
itself under the
jurisdiction of the European Court as part of its new trade deal with
the EU. And as usual Queen Nicola of Scotland had her moan about wanting
to be consulted. They just won't give up and accept the result of the
Hopefully, regardless of what the High Court says, I believe that Parliament will vote in terms of allowing Mrs May to send the letter required under Article 50, as the alternative would be a snap General Election at a time when every poll suggests that the Tories would get a large majority.
Deficit reduction and EU rules
22 minutes ago