FINALLY, three years after the referendum, we begin to have a clearer picture of our likely destiny post-Brexit. On October 31 we will leave the EU with no deal and little idea of what to expect thereafter. We seem committed, or is it condemned – like lemmings – to be led over the Brexit parapet by the very politician who assured us (deluded us?) that Brexit would be a straightforward and speedy process and, incidentally, provide our NHS with oodles of extra cash: the placard on his big red bus told us so.
Despite the PM's oft-repeated assertion that "no deal is better than a bad deal" the CBI, the TUC, the banking and financial sectors have consistently warned that a No Deal departure would be the UK's Armageddon, in terms of jobs, exports, investment, security and so on. But the view now being expressed by the majority of the candidates for the post of PM is that a No Deal Brexit is something we have to accept and embrace to satisfy the "democratic will of the people" (presumably without regard to the consequences). It's less clear – that is, extremely unlikely – that the democratic will of the people three years down the line, coupled with a reappraisal of the likely benefits/disbenefits, will be sought, required or considered.
Since the referendum, much has changed. A new PM; a disastrous General Election; a £1 billion deal with the DUP; multiple votes in Parliament, which all ended in deadlock, despite the will of MPs changing almost daily; extensions to the departure date; a threat to "close" Parliament ; fresh electoral registers with significant deletions and additions; and even changes in people's attitudes – a recent BBC survey concluded that immigration was no longer considered a problem and that most people had little idea what sovereignty was, let alone what would be repatriated: two issues which figured hugely in the lead-up to the referendum.
These changes in attitudes and the now-revealed consequences of a No Deal Brexit must now to be reflected back to the people so that they might express or reaffirm their view in the light of the information not available three years ago. The right to change (or confirm) your view is surely the true test of a democracy and one of which our MPs have taken full advantage throughout the whole sad and sorry Brexit saga.
One glimmer of light emerged from the gloom today, when the deputy leader of the Labour Party finally opined that his party must now come off the fence – put country above party– and vote to oppose Brexit and remain within the EU, thereby safeguarding jobs, our way of life, investment and security and protection from circling predators ("More Labour strife with Watson under fire over second vote call", The Herald June 18). If adopted, and alas this will be a big ask, it would afford the people – not MPs or Government – a genuine, definitive, final say on Brexit, either via a confirmatory referendum or a General Election. Given the enormity of the consequences of a No Deal Brexit, no other measure would seem appropriate.
J W Napier, Alva.
ROBERT Menzies (Letters, June 18) appears to criticise Mary Rolls (Letters, June 14) regarding her view that Ted Heath is our worst PM because of our original membership of the Common Market /EEC.
I feel that both correspondents do not put enough emphasis on the later stages in the developments which let to the formation of the European Union as we now know it.
I believe that where our economic relationship with continental Europe started to go pear-shaped was after we signed the Maastricht Treaty in 1992 with subsequent treaties in 1999 (Amsterdam); 2003 (Nice) and 2009 (Lisbon).
France, Ireland and Denmark recognised the possibly very far-reaching effect of the newly-formed EU on their sovereignty as nation states and held referendums. Had the full long-term impact of the treaties been similarly recognised by the wider UK public we would probably have also had a referendum in 1992 but we didn’t. We trusted our politicians and all we really got away with was not having the euro as currency.
I feel it is wrong therefore to blame Heath for the way in which the EEC, which we seemed quite happy with, evolved into a quite different political animal – the EU.
Bill Brown, Milngavie.
IT isn’t just the UK where a changing of the guard is taking place. In the EU, there will be new faces which will have as serious an effect on our lives as the “Pinocchio Show” in the Tory Party. One of those will be the President of the European Central Bank (ECB), as Mario Draghi steps down. An undoubted success on keeping Europe’s economy stable, he will be a very difficult act to follow.
The new President of the ECB will be facing turbulent times, with Donald Trump's trade policies, Brexit and irresponsible economic choices by some in the Eurozone. While we will have left (unless we come to our senses) the EU, it will continue to play a huge role in our lives. We must hope that the new president as is competent as Mr Draghi was, to maintain Europe’s place in the world economy.
GR Weir, Ochiltree.
Read more: Labour's Brexit strife breaks out after Tom Watson urges UK party to campaign for second EU voteWHAT with Brexit, TV licences for the over-75s, and Boris Johnson, things seem a bit a of mess. But of course, we can cheer ourselves with the realisation that had Yes voters from Nicola Sturgeon down had their way, things would have been very different.
An independent Scotland would not be facing Brexit, but would be struggling to meet the terms of Acquis Communitaire so as to rejoin the EU, having left in March 2016. This would mean massive public expenditure cuts and the application of VAT to items such as children's clothing and shoes.
Pensioners would not be facing paying for their BBC services, but would be coming to terms with John Swinney's report from 2014 which showed that Scotland could not afford to sustain their incomes at current levels.
And Scotland’s Prime Minister would not most likely be Boris Johnson, but a man who has been charged – though denies – nine charges of sexual assault, two of attempted rape, two of indecent assault and one of breach of the peace.
Thank God we voted No.
Peter A Russell,
Glasgow G13.
Peter A Russell Glasgow G13.
THE new runway for Heathrow appears to have been given the green light. Boris Johnson is on record as saying he will lie down in front of the first bulldozer that starts work on the new runway, and he is an honourable man
I hope the Conservative – and Unionist, don't forget them – Party is aware that if they pick Mr Boris Johnson as leader they, and the long-suffering public, may be forced to go through the whole pantomime again very shortly.
George Smith, Clydebank.
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