THE Government and its tabloid allies are acting out a pantomime, pretending judges and opposition MPs are blocking triggering Article 50 to prevent the UK leaving the EU. Their aim is to get more Conservative votes in the next election, especially from Ukip voters.
Most MPs have said they will vote for triggering Article 50. In the recent vote on the Government timetable for triggering it, just 23 Labour MPs out of 232 voted against; and a majority of those 23 MPs’ constituents likely voted Remain.
Prime Minister Theresa May is delaying the process. The appeal to the Supreme Court was intended to ensure only she and her Cabinet get a say on negotiating aims (“QC warns against ignoring voices of devolved nations”, The Herald, December 9).
Those aims could be mostly the interests of big donors to Conservative Party funds, like big banks, rather than the interests of the entire country.
The Conservatives have shown no concern for British industries like steel, actually opposing European Commission proposals to allow higher tariffs on state subsidised Chinese steel imports which are putting British steel workers out of jobs.
The Labour Party has said it will only vote to amend Article 50, not oppose it. One of Labour’s red lines is to ensure access for all British exports to the Single Market. Any negotiations that failed to secure this in some form would have failed anyway.
Labour’s other red lines, guarantees on maintaining workers’ rights and safety and environmental protections, and the UK Government replacing any lost EU investments, don’t require any negotiations, and so wouldn’t delay leaving either.
It’s not undemocratic for all MPs to have a say on what the UK’s negotiating aims are. When the referendum was solely on whether to leave the EU, 48 per cent of voters voted Remain, and some of the 52 per cent weren’t voting to leave the Single Market.
It wouldn’t be undemocratic to have a referendum on the final deal negotiated with the EU either.
But the risks of handing the Conservatives a propaganda victory and a large majority in Parliament, which would let them decide everything, without reference to the opposition, have to be taken into account.
Duncan McFarlane,
Beanshields, Braidwood, Carluke.
ST Genesius is the patron saint of actors and lawyers, including advocates; not a coincidence, with a current example being James Woolfe QC, Lord Advocate, appearing before the UK Supreme Court. Observing him indicated that he was playing a role – a hired gun – with no belief and little interest in what he is saying.
William Durward,
20 South Erskine Park, Bearsden.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel