In the third piece in our mini-series evaluating the EEA, our columnist wonders how both sides managed to become so hostile to moderate concepts.
In the first of a new mini-series evaluating the EEA, the author of ‘Norway then Canada’ argues the route has been wrongly neglected.
Labour have sunk efforts to trap us in the Single Market. A compromise should kick the Customs Union can down the road. Which leaves the ‘meaningful’ vote.
The referendum transferred from MPs themselves the decision as to whether to remain in or leave the EU and – with it, to regain our freedom to make our own laws.
Not being able to blame Brussels for our problems nor look to the EU for solutions will be immensely reinvigorating.
He made grotesque errors of taste and judgement – see “Rivers of Blood”. But even his critics admit that he was one of the great parliamentarians of the 20th century.
He was a man of Empire – not a little Englander, but a Great Britainer. One might also say a Global Britainer, which returns one to Brexit.
That means defending NATO from encroachment by an EU army, and supporting Central and Eastern European countries in staying out of the Euro.
We backed Brexit to make those in power more accountable. The House of Commons must not be ignored as if it were a mere debating society.
Although Brexit has not yet taken place, it has already had an admirably invigorating effect on Parliament.
The very last thing the tyrant would have done would be to restore sovereignty to Parliament.
There are good reasons for placing all this in the “too difficult” box. But if Brexit was about anything, it was about sovereignty.
In a nutshell, members’ top priority isn’t cutting immigration from the EU, let alone stopping payments to it: instead, it’s restoring self-government – and fast.
Some might like to table amendments to instantly delete bad EU regulations. But that would be a gift to those who seek to disrupt Brexit.
“It will help to ensure certainty and stability across the board.”