The spin around the #ChequersPlan is that it is a pragmatic compromise deal. It’s simply not. Rather it’s an “evolution” of the PM’s clear pledges at Lancaster House. It’s the status quo but with none of the benefits. So here are the facts about Chequers.
This is the fault of the Tories. You have spent 18 months arguing among yourselves. Added to which you had an unnecessary General Election and ended up dependent on the DUP, about which… well, enough said, but let’s admit that they aren’t big in the business of compromising. And you are still all fighting like cats.
When we leave the EU’s institutions we will sign up to the EU’s rule book on goods and agri-products meaning that the UK will have to apply the same bureaucratic EU rules to all goods produced domestically for the UK market. This is staying in the single market in all but name.
Well, that was what your boss, Ruth Davidson, and your other boss, Fluffy Muddle, and indeed his boss said was absolutely VITAL to Scotland’s future. You do remember you are a Scottish MP, right?
Not only will we stay tied to bad regulations such as the EU ban on hoovers with motors more powerful than 900w we will be compelled to follow future EU regulations. Having left the EU’s institutions where these rules are decided the U.K. will become a voiceless rule taker.
As Tom Arthur points out (1) Vacuum cleaner performance isn’t dependent upon power rating. (2) The reduction in energy consumption across the EU by 2020 will be equivalent to EIGHT medium-sized power stations. (3) Over 6 million tonnes of CO2 will not be emitted. (4) Consumers will save money. Given some of what is happening to climate at the moment, I’d say that was a good thing, wouldn’t you?
It’s argued that in future the U.K. can choose to diverge from EU rules. Yet as set out in the white paper our refusal to implement regulations or to change them will result in consequences with the EU imposing penalties.
Yeah, that’s true, but in fairness, it is true of any deal between countries. A deal with the USA would have rules and regulations, and the rules and regulations of a trade deal are nearly always the rules and regulation of the bigger partner and that will only be us if we do a deal with the Isle of Man or Moritania.
Independent arbitrator will act as a postbox for referring issues to the ECJ and issuing judgments which simply rubber stamp the ECJ’s rulings. Thereby the U.K. will still be subject to rulings of a foreign court.
You have to have an independent arbiter. It’s just not even slightly possible that the EU would see the ECJ as their arbiter but accept that the Engish High Court would be the UK’s.
Brexit should mean the supremacy of our Parliament. Yet with Chequers the ECJ will continue to work under the principle of the supremacy of the ECJ. It’s (sic) scope won’t be limited to the EU rule book but to environment, climate change, employment and consumer protection.
I can see that they would bother the right wing of your party. Frankly, I’d rather that the ECJ were the arbiter than the Americans, particularly this American government. Certainly on medicines, environment, food standards, agriculture, etc.
The PM pledged to end the rule of EU judges but Chequers means the ECJ will be the final arbiter in disputes about our £39bn Brexit bill, whether U.K. services regulation is deemed “equivalent” and the wider workings of Brexit. This means ECJ jurisdiction in perpetuity.
As I said above.
The prize of Brexit is regaining our ability to sign new trade deals. However, being aligned to the EU’s regulations makes a fee (sic) trade deal with the US difficult. The US will expect mutual recognition of each other’s regulatory standards which we won’t be able to offer
Again, I can see that that would appeal to the hard right. I suspect that most people would rather have the far stricter European standards. OK, it’s a lot of bother, but hygiene is hygiene and safety does matter. There won’t be much mutuality in the deal with Trump’s “America First” America, given that Trump is a businessman first and foremost, and he knows that the UK is screamingly desperate for a deal. Any Deal … But the fact that you mention it shows that you are quite prepared to meet the standards of America, but unwilling to do the same for Europe. Is this the Thatcher “English speaking nations of the world” thing?
Brexit means taking back control of our borders. Yet a mobility agreement with the EU will again mean preferential treatment for EU nationals and even the White Paper indicates continued access to benefits for EU citizens after Brexit.
If you are going to have a mobility with Ireland you probably have to have it with the rest of Europe. In any case, Britain could always have had stricter immigration from Europe. Othe European countries have. UK was just too lazy to set up a system which recorded and dealt with unemployed immigrants. There is a time limit on most immigration in Europe.
We are told that the Chequers Plan should just be accepted (despite how bad it is) because no alternative plans have been submitted. This is total rubbish. Here are the alternatives:
Status Quo Comprehensive Free Trade Deal (preferred by all sides) DExEU plan (worked on by David Davis based on the widely welcomed mansion house speech)
Chequers Plan (which pleases no one)
WTO rules (On which we already do trade with the US and China)
Can you let us know what all of these would cost us?
The Government should focus on the issues around the border between the U.K. and Ireland in order to secure an Advanced Free Trade Agreement (CETA +++). Currently a border already exists – in currency, VAT, excise duties and security which do not present any problems.
Using new technology as well as extending schemes such as the Authorised Economic Operator Scheme means any post Brexit customs checks can be done without a hard border. The EU insists on customs checks but in reality, no U.K. or Irish govt would ever accept a hard border.
But, hasn’t Mrs May admitted that this technology doesn’t exist? Even if it did it would be horrendously expensive to install. Do you know how many crossings there are on the 310-mile border? 275. That’s a lot of crossings to man. And the Irish would have to agree and to pay its share.
Remember thar (sic) the Chequers Plan is not a deal. It’s an opening offer to the EU to be compromised and watered down. Already the EU is pushing the UK towards a combination of EEA and Customs Union membership which is an unacceptable undermining of the vote public vote to leave.
That’s true. Barnier has already rejected it. You really can’t have that cake you just ate. We do not hold all the cards and this is not the easiest thing ever.
The commitments, promises and pledges given either at the dispatch box or in speeches by the PM have now “evolved”. In cute language that means the Chequers plan hands away the prizes of Brexit. We will have the status quo but worse off. It’s not in the country’s best interests.
But all the plans for Brexit leave your constituents worse off. Show me one that doesn’t.
Certainly, a Norway style deal is what some of your Tories would call, the worst of all worlds. You pay (without rebate), you follow the rules, you have almost no say at all in what these rules are, or who else gets to join, and you more or less accept the four freedoms and the jurisdiction of ECJ. Plus there is no farming payment, no social fund, no structural fund…
Don’t just take my word for it. The Times recently reported that “By more than two to one, voters do not believe [Theresa May’s] plan keeps faith with the referendum result.” Polling since Chequers shows the Conservatives have averaged 37% and not led Labour in a single poll.
The plan is crap. No doubt about that. It’s already been rejected by Barnier, so it’s not going to happen. Mrs May is not going to get big votes. She personally is as popular as …well, you know the expression (and we have young readers of sensitive dispositions). But Corbyn is no better. His party is just as riven as yours. I’ve yet to see an idea come from them.
The voters are unhappy with the Chequers Plan and their confidence in the government’s ability to deliver Brexit has plummeted. The people by 17.4m voted for the U.K. to leave the EU. If Brexit is not delivered properly there will be consequences at the ballot box.
I REALLY wish that you would remember that you are a SCOTTISH MP. Scotland voted 62-38 to STAY (and in a recent opinion poll, every bit as reliable as the one you quoted they were split 70-30).
We’re told to back Chequers or we’ll get Corbyn. That’s ridiculous. In reality if we don’t deliver Brexit fully we will lose seats like Mansfield, Middlesbrough, Banff and Buchan and much more. To fail on Brexit will usher in the chaos of Corbyn message
Are you suggesting that the Tory/DUP messages aren’t just as chaotic?
There is still time to ditch Chequers and take a different approach to deliver the Brexit articulated so well by the PM at Lancaster House. It’s right that colleagues have voiced concern and I’ll work with them to constructively engage with the government for it to change course.
Before Monsieur Barnier and his colleagues can give a definitive answer to the UK, it would help if he thought that there wasn’t going to be another general election and that the governing party weren’t tearing each other’s eyes out, stabbing each other in the back and pissing on each other’s chips… and bowing to the pressures of a loonie right-wing faction whose swivvel-eyed support they purchased with a not inconsiderable amount of OUR money. Think about it. You guys would the laughing stock of the world if Trump weren’t a much more important fool.
…When you arrange a photocall at a food bank, or a collection point for a food bank, you don’t stand there grinning like an idiot Chesire cat. You have the grace to look angry and ashamed that in, what purports to be the 6th largest economy on Earth, there are well over a million people who rely on food banks because they can’t afford food for themselves or their kids.
And you hang your head in shame that you are part of what has caused that horror to be a fact of life for so many of our people, including people in work and old folk … while others live in the lap of luxury.
This is what makes me utterly ashamed to be British. It’s what makes me bilious when I see one of your union flags and all it stands for. It is what has, on occasions abroad, made me pretend not to be British.
Good that you got in a wee advertisement for Tesco though. When you lose your seat, maybe they’ll find you a job.