The Daily Telegraph reports that peers have decided that Britain has a moral duty to make sure that Gibraltarians have a voice in the forthcoming E.U. talks.
See the link here.
Nearly 96% of Gibraltarians voted for Great Britain, to which they belong, to remain in the E.U.
The E.U. have said that Spain has a right to veto any decisions made during the E.U. negotiations, thus holding up the smooth running of the talks.
It's looking more and more likely that Theresa May will walk away without a deal.
The E.U.,who have stated they will 'punish' Britain for leaving the E.U. are throwing as many obstacles in the way as they can find, but at the end of the day, Britain will probably make deals with the countries within the E.U. regardless.
I remember, back in 1972, when we joined the Common Market, we did not sign up for all this political crap and the sooner we get out of it the better.
Sunday, 9 April 2017
Friday, 10 March 2017
These are my personal thoughts on Brexit as it becomes a reality.
Last night's programme, presented by Laura Kuhnsberg, seemed to me to be biased on the side of The Remainers. I have often wondered which side she was on? Knowing the BBC has to remain impartial, it must be difficult for presenters not to show their true feelings! However, Mrs. May did a good job of hiding hers during the Referendum campaign, didn't she.
After watching last night's programme, I felt that Ian Duncan Smith spoke the most sense. He has all along, in my opinion. Boris Johnson shows a very optimistic approach and I like him for that, but Ian Duncan Smith seems very measured.
Apparently the E.U. is seeking to charge us an exit fee for leaving the E.U. This is, no doubt, to discourage other countries from doing the same, i.e. leaving the E.U. It seems they want us to pay, anything between 0 and 69 billion pounds, before negotiations on trade deals can commence. Well I call that blackmail. Since we import more that we export there, surely it is a case of the boot being on the other foot. Perhaps we should be charging them for the opportunity of doing a trade deal with us after Brexit? They seek to punish Britain, but in so doing, they are merely shooting themselves in the foot.
Last week The Lords voted in an amendment to the exit bill, but they need to be careful when going against the will of the people. Perhaps there are too many Lords? A cull could be imminent. Their objections are only causing a delay, but if the delay becomes too tricky, we will surely just walk away from the negotiating table. Then the E.U. can come to us. We'll wait for the phone call!
Thursday, 2 March 2017
The House of Lords seeks to obstruct the Government from triggering Article 50 by the end of this month (March 2017)
The House of Lords (unelected peers) voted last night to delay the triggering of Article 50. That is what their actions aimed at! Seven of our Tory peers joined the establishment backlash against Brexit.
The furore is all about the E.U. nationals who reside in the U.K. and wish to stay here after Brexit. Theresa May will not agree to let them stay until we have negotiated with the European Union as to the fate of British nationals abroad.
Once the negotiations get started this will be one of the first issues raised and whatever is asked for has to be decided by all 27 of the member countries of the E.U. It could go round and round forever like everything else the E.U. has to agree to.
As a result of last night's vote, a petition has been started on the Internet, to replace the unelected Lords with elected individuals who would, perhaps, have the wishes of the people at heart! I signed it.
I can see that Theresa May will just walk away from the negotiations with the E.U. if they go on and on without resolution. We cannot wait forever. The whole thing is set to fail. Holland is currently debating whether to dump the Euro and revert to the Gulden or something else and I don't blame them. The Euro didn't do Greece any good, did it!
Wednesday, 25 January 2017
On Tuesday 24th January, the Supreme Court ruled that the Government must give parliament a vote on Article 50. Interestingly, the vote will not include the SNP members nor those in N.Ireland or Wales. To my mind this gives the government a better chance of the bill going through quickly and without delay at the end of March.
I feel that the judgement could not have gone a different way without the other six members of the judiciary who voted for parliament voting recently.
David Davis will now make haste to put a bill before parliament so they can vote and be done with it.
Parliament is split. Some members are for it and others against. The Labour Party, under the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn, have been told to vote for the bill so as to avoid making the country a 'bargain basement economy' (in the words of Jeremy Corbyn). He fears that if Brexit occurs, and it surely will, the government will make it too easy for foreign companies to invest in Britain. If the corporation tax is too low, the country will suffer. That is his opinion, but it is not mine.
Some parliamentary members insist that they must vote to represent the wishes of the people in their constituency and naturally, in some cases, this will mean a vote against, but surely the members of parliament must go with the result of the referendum? which clearly showed that the majority of the people in this country want out of the E.U.
So, we shall see how parliament votes. Hopefully they will vote for the bill and then we can get on with it. However, they were calls today for a second referendum under the premise that a lot of people have changed their minds since last June.
Sunday, 22 January 2017
On 17th January, Theresa May delivered her long awaited speech on Brexit to an avidly listening audience at Lancaster House.
The main points were:
We shall be leaving the single market in Europe.
We shall be leaving the customs' union.
We shall be using our own court system after Brexit.
We shall remain friends with other European nations whilst seeking to acquire trade deals with the rest of the world.
It was an excellent speech leaving no doubt in which direction we are heading.
Thursday, 5 January 2017
Following the surprise resignation of Sir Ivan Rogers, as Chief Negotiator for Brexit, on 3rd January 2017, we have a new appointee: Sir Tim Barrow. This has pleased some people and upset others. Although he was well qualified to lead the Brexit negotiations once Article 50 has been triggered by the end of March, he did not appear to be wholly in favour of Britain leaving the E.U.
The new successor will have a difficult job, but seems to have a more optimistic approach and I wish him well.
Friday, 11 November 2016
Last week, Gina Miller, a businesswoman, won a case in the High Court to ensure that Parliament gets a vote on the triggering of Article 50. Theresa May intends to contest the result in the Supreme Court on 23rd November.
Three judges agreed the case to allow Parliament to vote on the triggering of Article 50, which Theresa May wants to invoke in March 2017. They said it was unlawful for the Prime Minister alone to decide when to invoke Article 50.
This will inevitably delay the process unless the Supreme Court overturn the decision. Parliament want to know exactly how the Government intend to move forward with Brexit, the main sticking point being the Single Market. Many people who voted for Brexit did not vote to leave the Single Market, but the two things go together. Additionally Europe will not agree to the U.K. belonging to the Single Market unless we agree to the free movement of people as well.
It is thought that if put to the vote, most of Parliament and almost all of the over subscribed House of Lords, will vote against it. To my mind this is going directly against the democratic vote to leave the E.U. made during the Referendum back in June.
Meanwhile Donald Trump has been elected the next President of the U.S.A. with assurances that the U.S. will work closely with the U.K. once Brexit is under way.