IT is to be remembered that the UK voted to leave the EU. Much is being made by those wishing to remain that we did not know what we were voting for. This is pretty arrogant. I knew exactly why I voted to leave, and this was not to half leave. Boris Johnson has got no choice but to threaten to leave with no deal if necessary. If Theresa May had said to the EU in the first place that we are leaving and it is not open for discussion then I am certain that the EU would have agreed to a deal that suits us, not them. Instead it was put to them in such a way that we were asking their permission to leave and therefore they started to put up every block they could think of to get us to stay.
The reports of the UK being doomed if we leave with no deal are all scaremongering. How did we manage before the EU was formed? Perfectly well. The only reason that there may be delays at ports is that the EU is hell-bent on making it as difficult as possible. The EU is desperate not to lose the obscene amount of money we, its largest contributor, pay.
Boris Johnson was criticised for saying the amount of money we pay was incorrect. The figure he stated was perfectly correct, albeit it was the gross figure we pay before any rebate. Rebates are not automatic and must be applied for. If we pay only one pound a year, for me this would be far too much to remain in a club where we are obliged to abide by the rules whether we agree or not.
The EU is also petrified that when we leave and are seen to survive alter all, other EU countries could be lining up to do the same.
The Remainers talk about the current moves by Mr Johnson as being anti-democratic. I am not sure if they know the meaning of the word. As far as they are concerned it is democratic only if they agree with something.
As for the SNP, why did it vote against previous deals that were proposed if it did not wish to leave the EU with no deal? No matter what deal was agreed it would come up with a reason to oppose it, because deep down it is only interested in its one obsession.
It must not be forgotten that the ultimate aim of the EU is, and always will be, total integration and the creation of a European superstate. You cannot change this dream from the inside and that is why we must leave now, either with a deal that we agree with, or no deal.
Gordon Bannatyne, Milton of Campsie.
MICHAEL Gove is a politician whose opinions I used to regard as being honestly held and, always, as the result of some rational thought on his part. No longer. In an interview this week he said that the likely outcome of a No Deal Brexit “may cause difficulties and will bring benefits”. The truthful answer would have been “will cause difficulties and may bring benefits”. The Brexit shambles is corrupting political conduct at the highest levels. Now the Prime Minister has sunk to a level, previously proposed by Jeremy Corbyn, by threatening MPs with many years of service to his own party, with de-selection: for holding to their principles and behaving honourably.
The danger that the general public will disengage from politics altogether increases by the day.
Ian HC Stein, Dunblane.
BILL Eadie (Letters, September 3) is to be commended for his percipient observations on the anti-Brexit demonstration in Glasgow’s George Square. There were various groups expressing their individual frustrations to oust Boris Jonson but no common consensus as to future governance of the UK. The promotion of self-interest appears to have been foremost. Mr Eadie’s post-attendance disillusionment is best illustrated by his closing sentence “We are badly served by all politicians and there is a need for radical change in our system “. Perhaps not “all” but certainly many are conspicuous with unprincipled self-preservation and promotion in their respective political parties.
Allan C Steele, Giffnock.
THE arrival of Dilyn the rescue puppy at 10 Downing Street means that Boris Johnson ain’t the only occupant that’s barking.
Alastair Patrick, Paisley.
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