BREXIT: A difficult case for MP to make

I have sympathy for our MP. She's having to tread a very difficult fine line on the EU, (Berwick Advertiser, July 19).

Tuesday, 31st July 2018, 06:56 am

Apart from trying to pacify business after Boris’ attack, she had to balance between Mogg, whose odd views she supports, and May, who holds the purse and promotion strings.

For instance, Mrs Trevelyan notes that May set ‘clear red lines’ which she ‘has robustly stuck to’, but then says May ‘seems to give up on’ them. The clear red lines have become blurry blue ones in the interest of party unity.

However, Mrs Trevelyan is clear in her own mind – take back control of laws, money and borders, and ditch the European Court.

To me, it’s a bit like a stroppy kid saying ‘you can’t tell me what to do’. As we mature, we learn to share control. I wouldn’t have my marriage any other way.

Sign up to our daily newsletter

The i newsletter cut through the noise

Ah, but what about immigrants? We are all immigrants, or descend from some, but we do need a better immigration system, not one barring Syrian child refugees or May’s Windrush ‘hostile environment’.

We agreed to EU rules about migration. They included several control steps. Gordon Brown listed six, none of which May had used.

Incidentally, this week’s figures show net migration from the EU dropping, but from non-EU countries, over which we have total control, the figures are rocketing.

Money? ‘There is no Brexit Dividend’ (Institute for Fiscal Studies). As the North East is a poorer region, we get help from the rest of the UK. We should want similar sharing across the EU, not demand ‘our money back’.

Courts? Neither competition nor collaboration can work without laws. That’s why the UK has helped create about 800 international courts and tribunals. Without them we’d trust our Government even less.

Making our laws? We got our way on over 95 per cent of the EU laws we helped make. We also ‘won’ more exceptions than any other EU state.

Mrs Trevelyan had a difficult balancing act and a difficult case to make, but she can’t claim a ‘direct order issued by the British people’. There was a flawed advisory vote with a slim majority for a direction of travel.

A smaller percentage voted Leave than are required to call a strike. Immediately after the vote, Mrs Trevelyan and her ‘Moggites’ defined Brexit in their ‘hard’ way.

She says that nation states working ever more closely together is not ‘possible’. Mankind has watched that very development. It is states working on their own which is not possible, whatever Trump and Mogg try.

Peter Watts