Jacob Rees-Mogg: It is time to chuck Chequers

Posted: August 28, 2018 by tallbloke in Brexit, EU Referendum, government, Incompetence

mogg-lmlWhen the British people voted to leave the EU over two years ago it was an act of great political courage against the prophets of doom. 17 million people voted to leave because they believed in better. They believe in Britain and the kind of country we can build.

The Government would be wrong to be fearful of Britain enjoying an independent future. Theresa May’s Chequers proposals would shackle us to the EU forever. We would be out of Europe yet still run by Europe. This is why the Prime Minister should “chuck Chequers” and instead seek an a Canada style free trade agreement with the EU to make the most of the global opportunities that lie ahead.

The United Kingdom does not need to do a deal with the EU. The EU needs to do a deal with us at all costs. No deal means no divorce bill – handing a £40 billion Brexit bonus to the Government.

It is time the Government realised that the EU stands to lose much from no deal being agreed and stopped being cowed by the EU’s threats. It is time to face down vested interests in the establishment and put democracy first. Yet most of all, it is time ‘to chuck Chequers’, respect the referendum, be out of Europe, take back control and believe in Britain.

As such I have enclosed a copy of a useful briefing note on what the Chequers deal would mean for the UK; the opportunities it would forsake and the costs both monetary and democratic it entails. Please feel free to circulate this letter and briefing note to members and your constituents to assure them that the Prime Minister has alternatives, and that if the bullying stance of the EU continues we can leave on 29 March 2019 with either Canada +++ or WTO terms. We Believe in Britain.

The Three page point by point rebuttal of Theresa May’s letter to local constituency association chairmen can be read here.

Comments
  1. Paul Vaughan says:

    Weave Medians Weave

    “Trust in me and fall as well.”
    G’s US won’t U fake king whistle!!
    Something but the past is dUN!” — Tool “UNdertow”

    The helically polarizing grindstone sparks spiral queues of stable spin.

    Stars spangle spiraling democratic banners split undertow not by blunt means but transparently sharp medians brightly overturning polarized circulation.

    “I can’t see it in the night.”
    “I’m only faking when I get it, right?
    — “Fell on Black Days”

    Climatically dark disk eyes cornered the “searchlight soul” of Washington’s Sound Garden, encircling democracy in UNthinkable blackness.

    263C alt-x: Brightly we’ave opportunity to sea weather classically reoriented 2020 hindsight reveals stable codes for more than just climate.

  2. AndrewZ says:

    The EU has made clear from the beginning that it will not compromise the integrity of the Single Market. This is a genuine “red line” and not just a rhetorical one because of the enormous consequences of doing so. If the EU lets Britain cherry-pick which parts of the Single Market it will join, as the Chequers proposal requires, then the United States, China and other major trading nations will insist that WTO non-discrimination rules require the EU to offer the same options to them as well. The remaining members of the EU would then demand an even greater level of flexibility. The EU would have to completely redefine all its internal and external trading relationships, and it is obviously never going to agree to do that just for the convenience of a nation that has already decided to leave.

    Therefore, the Chequers proposal was dead on arrival. There was never any chance of it being accepted by the EU. So, the real question is why it was ever proposed. It may have been an attempt to reach some compromise that every faction in the Conservative Party could accept, and perhaps lay the ground for an “intransigent EU punishing Britain” narrative in case the talks broke down. It may have been a ploy to force the ultras out of the Cabinet and give May the freedom to pursue her own preferred outcome, whatever that actually is. But what if May really does think it’s a serious proposal? In that case, the negotiations with the EU will not reach any conclusion and we will be heading for an unplanned “No Deal” by default in March 2019.

  3. Adam Gallon says:

    Let’s see him stand for election as Conservative leader & thus PM. He won’t, as that means carrying the can when we drop out of the EU & Single Market with no deal.

  4. tallbloke says:

  5. gallopingcamel says:

    Why would anyone want to REMAIN?

    The EU is doomed……there is no tyranny worse than tyranny by bureaucrat.

  6. tallbloke says:

    GC: I dunno. They only ever moan about how bad leaving will be. Never tell us why they want to stay. Stockholm syndrome?

  7. pochas94 says:

    Could the US negotiate a trade agreement with the UK contingent on a successful BREXIT?

    Nah

  8. pochas94 says:

    Perhaps a deal with Canada could be a model for a potential one with UK.

  9. Stephen Richards says:

    Why can’t the tories stop shouting from the sidelines and ditch May. For crying out loud, it cannot be that difficult and if it is then the association chairmen need to start deselecting.

  10. oldbrew says:

    Crunch time, if there’s going to be one…

    CONSERVATIVE PARTY CONFERENCE
    ICC BIRMINGHAM

    30th September – 3rd October 2018
    https://conservativepartyconference.com/index/

  11. tallbloke says:

    Pochas: “Could the US negotiate a trade agreement with the UK contingent on a successful BREXIT?
    Nah”

    Depends what you define as a “successful BREXIT”. Under the Chequers betrayal, I agree, nah.Under a WTO Brexit, yes, of course we’d be free to negotiate a FTA with the US.

  12. oldbrew says:

    BBC News: “I’m confident that a deal is within our sights,” Mr Raab told the Lords EU Committee.
    . . .
    On the £39bn Brexit “divorce bill”, Mr Raab said a no-deal scenario could affect arrangements over payments to the EU.

    “I don’t think it could be safely assumed on anyone’s side that the financial settlement as has been agreed by the withdrawal agreement would then just be paid in precisely the same shape or speed or rate if there was no deal.”

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-45344203

  13. Adam Gallon says:

    “Under a WTO Brexit, yes, of course we’d be free to negotiate a FTA with the US.” As we would by leaving the EU, joining EFTA & retaining Single Market access with the EEA. Best of both worlds.

  14. Paul Vaughan says:

    We’ave Avangard Weave

    =
    If this doesn’t make you smile
    You don’t have to cry

    If this isn’t what you see
    It doesn’t make you blind

    If this doesn’t take you down
    It doesn’t mean you’re high

    If this isn’t making sense
    It doesn’t make it lies

    If this doesn’t make you free
    It doesn’t mean you’re tied


    “Apart from all other reasons, the parameters of the geoid depend on the distribution of water over the planetary surface.” – Nikolay Sidorenkov

    Get yourself afraid
    Get yourself contained

    First it steals your mind
    Then it steels your soul

    If you don’t want to “believe”
    You don’t have to try
    =
    — Washington’s Sound Garden “SuperUNknown”

  15. ivan says:

    On the £39bn Brexit “divorce bill”, Mr Raab said a no-deal scenario could affect arrangements over payments to the EU.

    Just what are we supposed to be paying for or should that be be what the EU should be paying us because we overpaid our club dues?

  16. oldbrew says:

    ivan – what are we supposed to be paying for – EU pensions for Brits and such like.

    Refunds for buildings etc. we helped pay for? Doubtful.

  17. pochas94 says:

    Adam Gallon says: “Under a WTO Brexit, yes, of course we’d be free to negotiate a FTA with the US.” As we would by leaving the EU, joining EFTA & retaining Single Market access with the EEA. Best of both worlds.

    Here’s one scenario: First, deal with Canada. Second, Britain exits EU. Third trade deal with Britain. Fourth, similar and compatible trade deal, US/Britain with EU. Fifth, China. Could all happen very quickly.

  18. oldbrew says:

    The EFTA States have accepted partial application of EU law and are in the Schengen zone.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Free_Trade_Association#Relationship_with_the_European_Union

    The UK is not in the Schengen zone and Brexit is supposed to mean freedom from EU law.

  19. dai davies says:

    Perhaps Australia’s recent round of musical chairs will set an example for rebel Tories at their conference.
    Not a big shift in position, but an about-face that leaves them heading in the right direction to fight the up-comming election on electricity prices, which is a big vote-winner if played well. Canada’s turning. UK?

  20. tallbloke says:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s