EU Tells Theresa May to Cancel Brexit
UK government setting stage for second referendum, Nigel Farage warns
Following the British parliament’s rejection of Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit deal, the EU Council President, Donald Tusk, has told the country to stay in the bloc.
“If a deal is impossible, and no one wants no deal, then who will finally have the courage to say what the only positive solution is?” the top EU official wrote on Twitter.
Frans Timmermans, the deputy head of the European Commission, EU’s executive arm, also advised the UK remain in the EU. Quoting British author CS Lewis he said: “We can’t go back and change the beginning, but we can start where we are and change the ending.”
Prime Minister May suffered a major political defeat after the parliament overwhelmingly voted against the Brexit deal. She lost the vote by 432 to 202, with 118 Conservative MPs rejection the deal negotiated with the EU. Sensing the opportunity, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn has tabled a vote of no confidence in May’s government, a move that could end her premiership after just two and a half years in office.
According to the critics of the deal, May’s agreement will keep Britain subject to the jurisdiction of EU-run courts. Under the terms of the current EU membership, regulations imposed by Brussels dictate country’s trade, customs, and immigration laws. The British exit from the EU, in keeping with the outcome of the 2016 referendum, was suppose to change all that. May’s deal will “strangle British sovereignty and reduce us to a craven vassal state,” commentator Brendan O’Neill noted recently in The Spectator.
If London and Brussels fail to renegotiate the deal before the March 29 deadline, the country will leave the EU without an agreement on the terms of trade. In case of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, the UK can continue to trade with the 27 member bloc in line with the pre-existing norms of international trade set up by the World Trade Organization (WTO).
If the no-deal scenario comes into effect, the EU will forfeit the $47 billion “divorce bill” slapped by its negotiators, a UK parliamentary report said.
Following the last night’s vote, the EU elite and the mainstream European media are running a fear campaign, painting a horror scenario in case of a no-deal Brexit. “If an agreement is not reached [before the March deadline], it will lead to the withdrawal without a deal with the union. In such a case, one must recon with chaotic outcome for the economy and other areas of life,” the leading German newspaper Die Welt declared. (Read here for Legal Insurrection’s take on a possible no-deal Brexit: Is UK Heading for a ‘No-Deal’ Brexit? December 21, 2018)
“The EU should prepare for the worst,” declared the German weekly Der Spiegel, “One should have no illusions: a segment of British lawmakers are fundamentalists, who are pursuing the Brexit almost with religious fervor.” The magazine complained that “the majority of the MPs, who are actually Brexit-skeptics, cannot come together without splitting their own parties and risking the anger of the voters incited by the [pro-]Brexit press.”
“Perhaps, Britain must undergo the catastrophe of a no-deal Brexit in order to come to its senses,” Der Spiegel concluded.
“Island of Losers,” read the headline in the German weekly Die Zeit. “The British exit will cause great damage to the EU. But the community is united like seldom before.”
German state media mocked the British government and parliament. “Britain’s political institutions have shown that they are not up to facing the challenges,” Deutsche Welle commented. “Brexit is likely the country’s greatest disaster.”
With President Donald Trump in the White House, the European political elite are fearful of losing a powerful member state to Brexit. “But it’s by no means assured that Europe will survive Britain’s departure,” the former German vice-chancellor Sigmar Gabriel warned on Tuesday. Adding that “Europe’s role in the world will be damaged in a way we can’t yet imagine. We’re getting a little foretaste in Washington, where the U.S. government wants to downgrade the EU’s diplomatic status.”
Given Brussels’ track record, one can not rule of an intrigue to keep Britian in the EU at this stage. According to the former UK Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, the British government is setting the stage for a second referendum. “I think and I fear we are headed on a path towards delays and probably a second vote,” he told Sky News. “I fear we will get an extension of Article 50 and what you will hear is voices in Westminster pushing for a second referendum.”
Will the EU and the British establishment dare to steal the verdict handed down following the biggest democratic exercise held in the Island Nation’s history? Committing this day-light robbery to keep the British people subservient to an unelected elite in Brussels will not secure the continued existence of the EU. Holding the proud and defiant British people against their wishes will only hasten the bloc’s demise.
[Cover image via YouTube] [Excerpts from the German media reports translated by the author]
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Proper response: “No.”
Verbose response: “We will continue as declared and exit from the EU on March 19th as per the existing schedule and legislation.”
May’s probable response – berating parliment for not being staunch remainers.
* March 29th.
Sorry about the error.
Brexit is a non-violent revolution. But, the Brits could get out their Yellow Vests if they need to.
Everything can be hashed out after that, and from that reality.
Nah…to leave on the 29th will require politicians with gonads the size of Rags left flaps.
The political elite has determined that there shall be no exit. End of story.
The reason that May lost is because the compromise bill, which she presented, was objectionable to both the pro-Brexit members and the anti-Brexit members.
It is understandable that the anti-Brexit bloc would vote against it, They would have voted against any act which would change the Britain-EU status quo. And, as the act did not remove Britain from the legal jurisdiction of the EU courts, it was a non-starter for most of the pro-Brexit members.
What is interesting, in the Der Spiegel quote, is that the European elite are horrified that an elected representative should have to vote the expressed will of his constituents, rather than for his own benefit or desires, and that they consider the European Union, including Great Britain, to be a superior political entity composed of vassal states.
Well, sure, a bunch of Germans want Britain to scrap Brexit, but so what?
The magazine complained that “the majority of the MPs, who are actually Brexit-skeptics, cannot come together without splitting their own parties and risking the anger of the voters incited by the [pro-]Brexit press.”
It’s encouraging to see that even Der Spiegel concedes that the voters at large do still have a little something to say about it. At least in theory. For now.
Just playing devil’s advocate. I’ve recently chatted with several conservative Brits (Trump fans), and they see many advantages to EU and virtually no disadvantages.
They basically sat Brexiters have lied about the cost of EU and lied by saying the EU dues would be applied to health services.
When the disadvantage is loss of national sovereignty, the ceding of judicial and regulatory authority to another polity and things of that sort, it is easy to overlook the problem, until it’s your ox that has been parcelled out to other member states and your industry that dies like the fisheries did.
The disadvantages of the EU are: crippling regulations, subsidies, and being tied into a protectionist trade regime with no ability to negotiate ones own trade deals. Of course Trump is a protectionist, so his supporters wouldn’t see that as a disadvantage.
If the British gov’t makes the people hold another nationwide vote on Brexit, then it is time for the British subjects to stand up the way we did in 1776. Otherwise, they will forever be subjects of unelected Brussels.
Hate to sound like I’m OTL (out to lunch), but could someone boil this entire Brexit kerfuffle — and a kerfuffle is surely what it is — down into something understandable? I know the gist, but what happens if they can’t do a deal? Is the referendum meaningless? What are the alternatives?
Maybe do it here (long?) or maybe give a link or two? Or maybe, Professor, someone on your team of expert commentators can give us some perspective.
This ol’ boy just can’t understand the dimensions of the thing.
The kerfuffle comes down to this.
Those that want to stay want to because they believe we have more influence inside the EU than outside of it.
And those that want to leave want to because the UK cannot control its own country.
On top of that the liberal media (is there really any other type) has manipulated the people to believe that a no-deal outcome is to be avoided at all costs. The reality is no deal is far, FAR better than the deal May was trying to get through parliament as it would have left the UK having to abide by UK laws and regulations while making all the worst nightmares of the remainers come true (i.e. we could NEVER influence EU laws that still apply to the UK because we have left).
The EU is laughing all the way to the bank on this one. They, like Trump, cannot believe their utter good luck about just how incompetent its opposition is in the UK parliament.
The EU has no need for a deal with the UK. The only thing the EU is concerned about is making a deal as painful and as difficult as possible because any other outcome would only encourage other countries to leave. Hence why it is not in the EU’s interest to make BREXIT as painless and easy as possible. That would send the wrong message to countries like Hungary and Italy and Greece etc.
At the end of the day the political elites got exactly what they wanted from day 1. Political turmoil with yet another shot at staying in the EU (a referendum now would be the THIRD referendum held on the subject and would confirm to the EU’s current practice of voting until the right decision is achieved).
sorry…this should have said “as it would have left the UK having to abide by UK laws and regulations” – “as it would have left the UK having to abide by EU laws and regulations”.
The kerfuffle explained: If the UK leaves the EU as scheduled, with no deal, UK sellers will automatically lose the right to export to customers in the remaining EU. The EU would also put up border crossings and customs posts on the UK-Irish border. This would hurt both the UK and the EU, so both sides should want a deal.
Of course the whole point of Brexit is that it will let the UK negotiate its own trade deals with other countries such as the USA; but it can’t do that until it’s free, so for however long it takes to get it done there would be no exports to the US either. So while in the long run the benefits will outweigh the costs, the immediate costs will be painful.
Then there’s the exit fee that the EU would expect as part of any deal. One good thing about a hard no-deal exit is that there would be no fee. The cost to the UK will be greater than the fee saved, so there will still be a high net cost, but not having to cough up that money will mitigate some of that. For the EU, they will lose UK trade and lose the money.
The bottom line is that a no-deal Brexit is a bad thing, but the deal May negotiated is even worse; it’s actually worse than no exit at all. No wonder it was defeated.
>> “Island of Losers,” read the headline in the German weekly Die Zeit. “The British exit will cause great damage to the EU. But the community is united like seldom before.” <<
Not united on matters of immigration policy. Not united on matters of fiscal policy. Not united on matters of military policy. Not united on matters of international relations…But by god their bananas have the proper curvature!
A second Brexit vote? Break out the Yellow Vests.
Forget yellow… go Mace!
The appropriate response to the EU mavens in Brussels is “sod off swampy”. We’ll break the china when we crash out, and things can get figured out after that.
“If London and Brussels fail to renegotiate the deal before the March 29 deadline, the country will leave the EU without an agreement on the terms of trade. In case of a ‘no-deal’ Brexit, the UK can continue to trade with the 27 member bloc in line with the pre-existing norms of international trade set up by the World Trade Organization (WTO).
If the no-deal scenario comes into effect, the EU will forfeit the $47 billion “divorce bill” slapped by its negotiators, a UK parliamentary report said.”
So what’s the problem?? It’s a Win-Win for the U.K., yet all these Downing St. fops are clutching their collective purse like a battered wife terrified to leave her bully husband.
All the U.K. has to do is nothing; nothing and E.U. goes away.
Hopefully the EU remembers what caused WWII. If they impose ridiculously heavy fines/tariffs/or judgments against Britain they may get a taste of England’s steel.
In one century Great Britain has fallen from an empire to essentially a vassal state of Germany. What the Kaiser and later the Third Reich could not do now has been completed. And as in the fall of all great states… internally created. Now if they can collapse the Pound to below $1.20 I can order that John Rigby 416 London Best Vintage rifle. (John Rigby and Co. is also German owned).
Why would their Grubernment think they have to do what the people voted for in 2016?
Really “the people” are stupid…
Gotta love how Der Spiegel has absolutely zero respect for the vote. It’s either their elected representatives following some kind of religious fanaticism, or their fear of voters whipped up by Euroskeptic press. Nowhere in this is there any room for the voters having actually thought for themselves or voted of their own free will, far less the notion such acts are worthy of respect.
But hey, if the UK’s elected representatives want to just cancel the whole thing, I can’t stop them. Nor can their voters.
People have been warning about this for YEARS.
Politicians from all parties in the UK didn’t actually expect it to pass. They just did it as a PR stunt to shut up the Brexiters because they believed their own bullshit and biased polls.
Just like Trump, they were WOEFULLY unprepared when Brexit passed.
From the very start their goal has been to try and artificially force enough pain so that they could throw up their hands and demand another vote ‘now that people understand how difficult it would be’.
This was their goal from the very start.
BBC began agitating for a second Brexit vote since the ballot results were made public. Every Brexit interview predicated on Brexit being bad and voters being misled into voting yes.
Of course the Krauts hate Brexit since it is they who controL the EU and thereby control the UK.
Ignore the will of the British people at your peril!
The Left always wants repeated votes until they win, then declare any further votes are prohibited.
Farage thinks that they may be setting up for a second referendum. Do they even have time to set on up? Now what happens if the voters still want to leave, hold another one till it gives them the answer they want. Also, wouldn’t a second vote anger the voters?
The media portraying this as some apocalypse, that they’ll be riots, people starving, etc.
If Trump doesn’t sign the CR, the world will end!
So far, that prediction is as accurate as Nate Silver’s 2016 prediction on Felonia being a sure bet to win the WH.
If the UK doesn’t cave in and pay off the EU to regain their sovereignty, the world will end!
Sounds to me like it’s the same headline writer.