Conservative National Convention
Conservative Home has given a lot of publicity to the request for an EGM of the National Convention in order that a motion can be made regarding the position of Mrs Theresa May as the Leader of the Conservative Party.
I totally agree with everything that Dinah Glover says but would add comment about this awful Withdrawal Agreement.
Article 4 delivers for the EU that all legislation adopted by the EU will have to be implemented by the UK without scrutiny during the implementation period. In addition adopted legislation will continue to be implemented should there be no agreement on the future relationship between the UK and the EU. All under Union Law
All this and the interpretation of the 585 pages of this legally binding Treaty will be governed by Union Law. Note all the footnotes referring to EU Directives that will be taken into account before the ECJ. Remember too that the UK cannot Exit the EU without the permission of the EU.
It is said that the EU cannot be unreasonable and withhold that permission but let us be clear this Withdrawal Agreement was drawn up by the EU Commission and we have to examine how long it has taken to negotiate and agree other Trade Agreements with Third countries. The EU would argue before any arbitration panel that this is what they normally do, cross every T and dot every I.
It would not be unreasonable for such a Trade Agreement to take 5-10 years to complete. In that period the UK would be trapped into complying with every legislative proposal that emerges from the Commission and adopted by the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament in which the UK would have no say
Is that a good idea to put before the voters in the UK when they decided to LEAVE the EU in 2016.
The Withdrawal Agreement in effect restricts our sovereignty.
It also means that we have to comply with EU trade policy, adhere to decisions on foreign and security issues, and any political motions initiated.
I have wondered if Westminster MPs have really understood what the Withdrawal Agreement actually means. The debates in the HoC were not on the substance of the Agreement but the process which demonstrated the inability of MPs to get to grips with the implications of what they might agree to.
Many MPs looking over their shoulder to protect their careers.
The EU did not draw up this Agreement to aid the UK to exit the EU.
Mrs May and her small group of advisers and civil servants who have not been intimately involved with the EU Institutions nor in their corridors have been turned over by EU negotiators.
Looking at the body language of Mrs May during her informal chats with other EU member state leaders I might be tempted to say that the blame is all on somebody else not her and her government. Look at the statement she made to counter the awful result of the local elections on Thursday. She implies the public are not concerned about the Withdrawal Agreement but does not understand that voters do read, can google, use social media and are well informed.
If the Withdrawal Agreement was voted down by a margin of 230 votes as a bad deal the same MPs cannot suddenly now vote on the 4th attempt to say it is a good deal.
I won’t be tempted to voice an opinion on a Customs Union it is such a bad idea not worthy of consideration
We need a new Leader NOW who will stand up for the sovereignty of the UK and who will initiate negotiations conducted by those who have expert knowledge of how the EU functions, negotiates and resolves problems.
The EU don’t kick the can down the road they are dogmatic and if not challenged will win.
Wilfred Aspinall
30 years experience in the EU
Former Member of the European Economic and Social Committee
EU Strategy Adviser to UK City of London concerns and others.
THE TOPIC 