Theresa May sells the electorate to Brussels in return for her prime ministership.

Theresa May has agreed to remain in the EU without the vote we previously had as a full member. A worse political failure could not be imagined, unless it was her disastrous decision to call an election on a platform of seizing pensioners’ houses to pay for Britain’s bankrupt social care system. Our old peoples’ savings would not only be used to pay for those pensioners who preferred like the grasshopper to sing all summer, but for Britain’s huge immigrant population as well. Immigrants whom she failed to stop from flooding the country when she was Home Secretary. In losing the election she lost her entire bargaining position in Brussels.

What did she do? Abandoning the British electorate in Florence, she threw herself on the mercy of Brussels to save her Prime Ministership. Most importantly she offered Brussels a two year extension, thus avoiding a cliff hanger exit which would have forced M. Barnier to negotiate in 2019. Now he can just play us like a half dead fish for years to come, or until a fresh British election is called. It is all Brussels needs. If Macron and Merkel press for more concessions, they know it will open the door to a leadership contest in the UK with Boris Johnson or Rees Mogg emerging as the likely winner. The words stalking horse come to mind – or Boris’ sacrificial lamb?

President Macron confirmed this today when he called for ‘clarity’ over the May’s proposals. ‘Clarity’ means the EU is not going to negotiate, never intended to and never will. Only a second ‘correct’ reformation result or a simple surrender will do.

 

 

 

 

 

 

.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


*


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

8 Comments on Theresa May sells the electorate to Brussels in return for her prime ministership.

  1. “The worst political failure”, was the decision to have the latest referendum in the first place. A referendum had already been held, in 1975, and had confirmed British membership, that should have been the end of the matter, but no, the weak kneed toff Cameron didn’t have the guts either to deny the referendum or to defend Britain’s essential interest in remaining a member. England now faces economic catastrophe, PM May understands this, perhaps this is the one issue she will get right.
    The most infuriating aspect of this discussion is the talk of “sovereignty”, as if the British public ever had any control over Westminster/Whitehall. It wasn’t Brussels that let the wogs in, that was all home grown.

    • In 1975, we voted to remain in or get out of the Common Market. That was not the same thing as the present EU, with its military ambitions, its arrest warrants, and its ludicrous euro. And we were mis-sold the project in 1975; and this time we were offered World War III, a £4000+ fine per annum, dead grannies, a ruined currency, and (guffaw) the disapproval of dead-in-the-water Pres. Obama if we voted to quit this monstrous and unaccountable shambles this time. Such fearmongering suggested that those who wanted to Remain had no plausible positive qualities/advantages of the EU to offer. A No vote (a repeat of my 1975 offering, as it happens) seemed in order.

      May’s mistake was twofold: offering a specific sum of money for quitting when she should have asked on what legal basis the UK owed the EU anything (which, granted, it may, under the law of contract); and suggesting an extension to the Article 50 deadline, when she should have repeated her “No deal is better than a bad deal” line (a.k.a. “Perch and twirl”).

      My opinion of Cameron is unprintable. The question of public control over Westminster is a whole other subject. I hope you have survived the weather in Florida.

      • The oft repeated claim that in 1975 Britain voted to remain in the Common Market only, rather than to remain in the developing “United States of Europe”, is a cop out. I was 27 in 1975 and enthusiastically voted to stay in, hoping that the promised European Union would soon become reality.
        I wanted an end to Westminster, an end to the Monarchy and the complete incorporation of England into a united Europe of free movement of goods, capital and labor. Contrary to current opinion, this was clearly the way forward for Europe and was understood by any thinking person with even the slightest knowledge of the history of the European Union movement.
        What England has done now is to isolate herself, in a fit of pique, from the economic anchor that has allowed the most irresponsible economic management in the Nation’s history. Brace yourselves, the consequences of this madness will be catastrophic.

  2. After forty years of taking a mistrustful interest in politics, I ought not to have been gullible, but I’m sorry to have to admit that I trusted Theresa May to do what the British people told her to do.

    I expect many readers of the SR share my feelings about Mrs May’s betrayal, but what are we to do?

    Do we vote UKIP? UKIP has fallen apart.

    Do we vote for the most anti-EU of the parliamentary candidates who have a chance of winning? Some of us have been doing that for decades, and it’s got us nowhere.

    Do we hope that a new party, perhaps formed by the Rees-Moggs, the Farages and the Hoeys, will be swept to power? Voters’ long-standing loyalties and “demographic change” (a polite phrase for “hostile colonisation”) are against us.

    Do we emigrate to a better-run country, perhaps in Eastern Europe? But we’re patriots.

    What *do* we do? I wish I knew.

  3. WHY are we still acting as a supplicant to the cursed EU? We are leaving but we should NOT agree to pay a ridiculous divorce settlement when 10000 should more than cover it. We need a STRONG negotiator to deal with the claim but NOT the pair of clowns who are currently doing it!

    • In a way, Mr McGarry, I’m glad that our negotiations are being conducted by clowns, because it increases the chances that the negotiations will fail, with the result that we’ll have a chance of gaining control of our borders sooner rather than “about two years” later (or never).

      We’ll still need to elect a government that *wants* to control our borders, of course, but the conditions in which such a government can do its essential work must be established first, and established ASAP, before ongoing demographic change makes such a government unelectable.

  4. I believe a person who before Brexit voted to remain is not an acceptable person to be at the helm. Someone who is a believer in leaving and a Brexiteer at heart needs to be in power and not a waverer. Boris or Rees is good for me rather than May who has lost credibility.