It was a grave error for Article 50 to be triggered when it was. Despite warnings about the complexities of a Brexit deal, the alarm clock was wound up and started ticking in March 2017.
The alarm is set to chime next March and we still have no deal. It is worth remembering the leader of my party, Jeremy Corbyn, wanted to trigger Article 50 the day after the EU referendum – a reckless move that thankfully did not come to pass.
Read more: Scots battle to win MPs' right to halt Brexit 'likely to succeed'
But Theresa May has still rushed into this process, adopting a hardline “my way or no way” approach that has understandably infuriated Brussels. On the day Article 50 was set in motion, EU Council President Donald Tusk said the EU would seek to “minimise costs” for citizens, businesses and member states. He can’t be blamed for sticking to his word.
As many predicted, the Brexit process is in a mess, with the lies of the Leave campaign now fully exposed, and the harsh reality of
a hard Brexit now abundantly clear. We’re not handing over extra money to our NHS – we’re having to stockpile medicines.
Read more: Exports to EU support 40,000 jobs in and around Glasgow, as no-deal cliff-edge fears mount
It’s no wonder support for a “People’s Vote” is growing. It is not inevitable we leave the EU next March. Voters have the right to change their minds. I believe the UK has the right to change its mind and that’s why I am proud to be involved in the cross-party legal fight, seeking a ruling from Europe’s highest court on whether Article 50 can be revoked if MPs vote to do so. Following the Labour Party conference, with shadow Brexit secretary Keir Starmer putting the option of remaining back on the table, I believe we can build a majority in the UK Parliament to reverse Brexit.
If we go ahead with leaving the EU, it will be the poorest in society who will suffer. For the sake of the workers of this country, and generations to come, I am not prepared to sit back and accept that Brexit is inevitable.
- Catherine Stihler is Labour MEP for Scotland.
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