In her speech today, Theresa May set out exactly what the UK's decision to leave the European Union means. She said, clearly, that it means leaving the European Union, not a little bit but completely. Why anyone should ever have thought otherwise is something of a mystery known only to those who have sought to try to reverse the result of June's referendum.
Inevitably, those who never wanted us to leave and are looking for every possible excuse for preventing it from happening, have been making their usual noises in the media. Leader of the Scottish Nationalists, Nicola Sturgeon, has whined on, again, about calling another independence referendum and has claimed that Mrs May doesn't have a mandate to take the 'whole of the UK' out of the EU; this is, of course, nonsense. Ms Sturgeon keeps trying to perpetuate the myth that Scotland is separate from the United Kingdom, which it isn't; no doubt other parts of the UK which voted to remain within the EU could make similar baseless claims. It was the UK as a whole which joined the EEC in 1973 and it is the UK, as a whole, which has voted to leave now; individual parts simply have to accept the majority decision as is the case with any democratic decision.
Sturgeon is also on slightly dodgy ground with her threats of holding another independence referendum. Current opinion polls (if they can be believed) show that there is little enthusiasm for independence amongst Scots and, in any case, no referendum would be binding unless it had the blessing of the UK's government. Whatever she may think or say, Ms Sturgeon is not the final arbiter in such matters.
Another of those who want to reverse the referendum result is Tim Farron; in case anyone has forgotten, he's leader of what remains of the Liberal Democrats in the House of Commons. Along with his Liberal Democrat colleagues and in denial of his party's name, Mr Farron is determined to do whatever he can to frustrate the democratic will of the British people as expressed in the referendum. Today, his response to Mrs May's speech was to say that while she had a mandate for initiating discussions with the European Union, there was no mandate for what he continues to refer to as a 'hard Brexit'. He says that 'hard Brexit' was not an option at the referendum and, therefore, people did not vote for it. He completely ignores the simple fact that the option was 'In' or 'Out', and the people voted 'Out', following a highly detailed campaign in which the full consequences of such a decision were made very, very clear. At the time, no one suggested there were shades or colours of 'Brexit' and it is only since the result went the 'wrong way' for some that this idea has been invented.
Obviously, Mrs May will trigger Article 50 fairly soon and the process of negotiating the UK's exit will commence. In around 18 to 24 months time, an exit agreement will emerge and Mrs May has said that she will put this to both Houses of Parliament for ratification. This is when things may well become messy. While it is probable that the House of Commons will vote for ratification of any realistic deal, the House of Lords, with a hugely disproportionate representation of Liberal Democrats may well reject any agreement that does not effectively keep the UK tied very closely to the EU and pays mere lip service to the referendum result. Mr Farron has indicated as much today.
If Mrs May sticks to her guns, and there's currently no reason to think that she won't, we could well be heading for something of a constitutional crisis around this time in 2019. Will the House of Lords really vote to overrule the Will of the People ? If it does, God Help Them.
No comments:
Post a Comment