EU Withdrawal Bill receives government assent

The Royal Assent was given to the European Union (Withdrawal) Act earlier this week, meaning that it is confirmed that we are leaving The EU in March next year.

But are we?

The last few weeks have been dominated by manoeuvring, backroom deals and uncertainty.

Theresa May apparently gave ‘assurances’ to remain supporting Tory MP’s that she would give them a ‘soft’ BREXIT, MP’s who have since been critical of the vote that stops them having a say on the final deal.

Some media outlets have been reporting that a compromise has been made where Speaker Bercow can decide whether the Government needs to go back to The House in the event of a deal that doesn’t match what he wants – why so much influence would be vested in this pompous Popinjay, a remain supporter as seen by his vehicle stickers, is beyond me.

Labour are all over the place, an opposition that fears taking a stand either way for fear of upsetting their remain supporting intelligentsia in the South and their leave supporting core base in the North, not to mention their major donor the Unite Union who are solidly behind remain. The ‘principled’ Jeremy Corbyn, an outspoken critic of the EU when a backbencher, has been a passive remainer since before the Referendum in an attempt to put party unity before country.

One day they are saying we must leave the Single Market and Customs Union, the next they are not ruling out a further referendum.

This morning we saw Tory minister Greg Clark on Sky’s Sophy Ridge show state that a ‘transition period’ could extend beyond 2021 if the ‘evidence’ changes – a transition period that is merely a way of delaying BREXIT until the remain element can carry on their new version of project fear and either keep us in the EU by stealth (BRINO) or reverse the referendum result completely.

This whole farce is further evidence that the establishment in this country do not respect the voice of the British people who voted to leave in 2016, but it is hardly surprising. In his book, ‘The Road to Freedom’ which was published before the Referendum was even a possibility, UKIP leader Gerard Batten MEP predicted just such a response from the ruling class if we went down the road of triggering Article 50 after a successful campaign to get ourselves out of the EU.

Whilst we are officially leaving the EU, the ‘transition period’ is just what the powers that be want to try and get a second bite of the cherry – after all, the Irish were made to vote again after a referendum went against The Lisbon Treaty and the French and Dutch were ignored after votes against the EU constitution (They just changed the name and whacked it through without a vote).

Any attempt to bring ‘the deal’ back to The House will only weaken our hand in negotiations – after all, if Barnier and the Brussels negotiating team know that offering a bad deal will bring the UK back to the table and delay BREXIT then they have no incentive to offer us anything like what we are looking for.

It’s not over yet

——————————————————————————————————

You can purchase a copy of Gerard Batten’s book ‘The Road to Freedom’ here for a full overview

Advertisements

BREXIT means Exit

The following is a guest post by UKIP London MEP and  BREXIT spokesman, Gerard Batten

gb-office-1

The 17.4 million people who voted to leave the European Union on 23rd June 2016 expected that to happen without delay.  But six months later Prime Minister Theresa May has done nothing to make it happen.  What is more she does not intend to do anything for another three months, and even then she will not commit to what Brexit actually means.

 

We have no reason to trust Theresa May.  She was a Remainer in the Referendum campaign, and had Remain won she would be telling us it was the right decision and in our best interests.  Having been on the losing side, she now finds herself in charge of implementing the winning sides decision.  But instead of outlining her EU exit strategy, she merely mouths the slogan ‘Brexit means Brexit’ without explaining what it means.

If Mrs May were serious she could have taken immediate action and triggered Article 50 the day after she was appointed Prime Minister, merely by writing a note to the European Council to that effect. Instead she did nothing, except to give the Remain camp the time to re-group and counter attack, which they duly did by taking their delaying tactics to the High Court.

Continue reading

The Supreme Court Case on Article 50

Today is the fourth and final day of the Supreme Court hearing over whether or not the Government has the ability to Trigger Article 50 of The Lisbon Treaty to start the procedure to leave the European Union or whether it has to go to a Parliamentary vote.

Royal Courts of Justice

The Government argue that they do not need to have a vote and can use The UK Royal Prerogative in light of the Leave vote at the referendum on 23rd June, a position that the High Court has already rejected.

The case, brought by Gina Miller, argues that Parliamentary Democracy needs to be upheld and as such the Government should be accountable – indeed, she has painted herself as somebody who is fighting for our democracy.

With that in mind, it is worth both Ms Miller and the judges looking at the following instances pertaining to the European Union –

1972 – UK Prime Minister Edward Heath used the RP to sign the treaty for the UK to join the European Economic Community (Common Market) without prior UK Parliament approval

1987 – UK Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher used RP to sign the Single European Act without prior UK Parliament Approval

1992 – Prime Minister John Major used the RP to sign the Maastricht Treaty without prior UK Parliament approval

1997 – Prime Minister Tony Blair used the RP to sign the Amsterdam Treaty without prior UK Parliament approval

2007 – Prime Minister Gordon Brown used the RP to sign the Lisbon Treaty without UK Parliament approval

2016 – November 3rd – UK High Court decides that Prime Minister Theresa May cannot use the RP to enact Article 50 – withdrawal from the European Union – without prior approval of the UK Parliament

Surely, ‘Stare Decisis’ should come in to play – the legal principle of determining points in litigation according to precedent. Indeed, many find it puzzling that the High Court did not come to this conclusion during the original case although , as highly qualified and respected Judges, they must have had their reasons.

It also begs the question – why are these ‘Champions of Democracy’ only acting now when Parliament has been bypassed using the legislation on previous occasions pertaining to the EU? Is it because this time they do not like the potential outcome?

However, last night saw a Parliamentary vote on the Government’s timetable for activation of Article 50 and came down heavily on the side of the motion by 461 votes to 89 – irrespective of the outcome of the case they now have the Parliamentary approval to push ahead, although worryingly they accepted a Labour amendment to the motion saying that Parliament would need to be informed of the details, effectively tipping our hand in negotiations with Brussels.

brexit-demo-nov-2016

The Charade of Article 50

Whilst the High Court and Supreme Court cases, plus the Parliamentary vote itself, have produced hours of media coverage and masses of newsprint, this whole charade misses a major essential point.

Article 50 was put in to The Lisbon Treaty as a mechanism that was never supposed to be used. The Government only need to send a quick fax or letter to Brussels informing them that they wish to leave to trigger the proposed 2 year ‘negotiation’ period. During this ‘negotiation’, the remaining 27 member states decide what terms they wish to trade with us under upon departure – our own team can make suggestions but will not be involved in those negotiations. Effectively, we will be twiddling our thumbs waiting for what the EU deign to come back and give us.

If the Government do get their ‘deal or no deal’ at the end of the two years then it has to come back to Parliament to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act which took us in to the ‘Common Market’ (as it was then) in the first place.

If the Government genuinely want us to Leave with the best deal possible, they could impose a three line whip to repeal the Act now and negotiate afterwards from a position of strength. After all, in the worst case scenario we go back to WTO rules immediately which would cost the country half of what our EU membership does at the moment even if maximum legal tariffs were imposed – those tariffs, as a net importer from the EU, would harm them far more than they would harm a globally trading, outward looking and independent Britain.

We have nothing to lose and everything to gain by ignoring Article 50 and triggering repeal of the 1972 European Communities Act. The question is, does this Conservative Government really want to give the people what they voted for or do they wish to fudge and delay either to a watered down version where we remain in the European Economic Area (EEA) with continued payments to and regulation from the EU or even, dare I say it, a second referendum? If so, history and the ballot box will not be kind.

The Road to Freedom

GB 2 7th July 2010

If you would like further information on how we should leave the EU, we would highly recommend Gerard Batten MEP’s book, ‘The Road to Freedom’ – this can be purchased via the following link

http://www.bretwaldabooks.com/book.php?p=221

Dispelling the myths around BREXIT

CD in Yiewsley with GBDuring our ongoing discussions with people on street stalls surrounding the EU Referendum a number of questions keep coming up.
Below, Gerard Batten MEP dispels the myths created by the Remain campaign about the dangers of leaving the EU
1) Would leaving the EU endanger jobs and trade, and could the EU put up trade barriers against the UK?

When we leave the EU it cannot put up arbitrary trade barriers against the UK as that would against World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, which all EU countries agree to and which govern world trade. And even if they could why would they want to? We have a massive trade deficit with the EU – they sell us far more than we sell them.
Britain currently exports goods and services to the EU to the value of £228.9 billion, whereas their exports to us amount to £290.6 billion: therefore we have a trade deficit with the EU of £61.7 billion. Germany, Spain, France and Italy etc.will still want to sell us their cars, wine and holidays etc. Trade will continue as normal. [i]
And remember, Britain is the fifth largest economy in the world and we are a world trading nation: and while we have a trade deficit with the EU we have a trade surplus with the rest of the world.   Our trading success lies in four hundred years of experience; English being the international language of business and science; and the trust that foreign companies put in the English legal system and contract law.

Continue reading

TTIP Update

I received the following earlier today from our London MEP, Gerard Batten, regarding the shadowy Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP)

GerardBattenoffice

You recently wrote to me about your concerns about TTIP.  I was pleased to tell you that I will be voting against this treaty when this comes before the European Parliament, and I would now like to update you on the latest situation.

On Wednesday 9th September Jean-Claude Juncker, President of European Commission, gave his annual State of the Union speech  to European Parliament.

In his speech Mr Juncker referred to TTIP and said unequivocally that he was “in favour of the TTIP treaty”.   I felt that you should be aware that this was his, and the European Commission’s position.

Mr Juncker further remarked that that we wanted “international representation for the euro-zone” on such bodies as the “Bretton Woods Institute and the International Monetary Fund”.  He said that he wanted a “single representation by the European Union” on these bodies.

While the UK is not part of the euro-zone, his remarks demonstrate the EU’s ambitions to replace national representation on international bodies still further, thereby further reducing the democratic accountability of national governments to their electorates’.

I will update you further on the TTIP issue as things develop.

Yours sincerely,

Gerard Batten MEP

UKIP

 

Public meeting in West Drayton

UK and EU flag

Why you should vote ‘No’ to the EU – A public meeting to outline the case for UK Independence

UKIP Hillingdon are proud to announce our first public meeting to put the case for EU withdrawal (BREXIT). This is a non-aligned meeting where people from all political parties and none are welcome to attend, listen to the arguments and participate in our popular question and answer sessions

Speakers –

GerardBattenofficeGerard Batten MEP – A founder member of UKIP in 1993 and London MEP since 2004, Gerard has seen the inside workings of the Brussels Parliament and how it impacts on our rights and freedoms as British Citizens

 

 

 

 

Mark HughesMark Hughes – Listed in the Top 100 fund managers by Citywire , financial expert Mark Hughes has run his own investment company since 1997. Mark believes our businesses and economy will flourish outside of the unnecessary regulations imposed by the EU

 

 

 

 

Chaired by UKIP Hayes & Harlington spokesman Cliff Dixon

 

Date – Thursday 23rd July – Meeting starts at 8.30pm

Venue – Yiewsley & W. Drayton Community Centre, Harmondsworth Rd, West Drayton, UB7 9JL

For further details, please contact UKIP Hillingdon

Tel – 07939 223659                Email – ukiphillingdon@tiscali.co.uk

 

UKIP public meeting in Hayes

With the by-election in Charville moving in to it’s final stages, UKIP Hillingdon are running a public meeting in Hayes at Brook House FC on Kingshill Avenue.

Starting at 7pm on Thursday 20th November, speeches will be followed by a question and answer session from the floor where you can quiz the panellists on the issues that affect you.

Headline speakers

Gerard Batten MEPGerard Batten was one of the founding members of UKIP, and has been the MEP for London since 2004.

Formerly our Home Affairs and Immigration spokesman, he has a wide knowledge of law and order issues and has written a number of books on how the EU is eroding our democracy.

 

 

 

 

Richard Barnes was formerly the leader of Hillingdon council and Deputy Mayor to Boris Johnson on the GLA. He joined UKIP earlier this year

Richard Barnes

 

Chairing the meeting –

Christine Taylor

A prominent anti-3rd runway campaigner, Christine is a tireless worker for people affected by Heathrow expansion

Christine Taylor

Support speaker

Cliff Dixon is the Chairman of UKIP Hillingdon and our candidate in the Charville byelection. A lifelong resident of the borough, he is a familiar sight on the streets of Hayes

CD at Lee Rigby memorial walk