Some of my constituents have recently written to me
to ask me to vote against the Brexit agreement.
Many of them will be aware that the Prime Minister has announced that the vote on her Brexit deal will be postponed to the new year.
My view is that it was a mistake to postpone the
Brexit deal vote, as I believe it would have helped the Prime Minister in her
renegotiation if she could have gone to Brussels with a clear message from
Parliament that the deal was overwhelming rejected by MPs. The Brexit agreement
is one of the most important internationally-binding treaties this country will
ever sign. Tinkering with it or changing the non-binding political declaration
will not suffice – We need wording in the withdrawal agreement amended. Causing
any unnecessary delay will only add further uncertainty to the Brexit process.
Unless the Prime Minister is now able to renegotiate a better deal that actually takes back control of our laws, our trade and our sovereignty, when this deal is put before Parliament, as it currently stands, I will be voting against it.
So I agree with many of my constituents that this deal needs to be voted down.
However, these emails I have received proceed to state that "one thing is clear amidst the widespread uncertainty we face: leaving the EU would considerably disadvantage the U.K., placing us in a precarious and potentially disastrous position for years to come", and suggest that we revoke Article 50 and support a second referendum.
I fundamentally disagree with this assertion that the UK will be weaker outside of the EU.
Nobody has ever said that leaving the EU would be walk in the park. But we were also told by economists and other so-called experts in 2016 that our economy would take a bad hit if the country voted to leave the EU.
It is an understatement to say that these forecasts have proved to be misguided.
We now stand in a strong position to weather the challenges of Brexit as one of the world’s largest and most competitive economies.
Staying in the EU would bound us to continue sending billions of pounds to Brussels and undermine our Parliament's sovereignty to legislate in our country's interest.
Indeed, what we have seen in the negotiations so far is the inflexible, bureaucratic and heavy-handed approach from Brussels that has typified our relationship with them for the past 4 decades.
The EU negotiators have refused to acknowledge the genuine economic interests of the UK and the EU, and have instead become fixated on setting a precedent with Brexit to deter other member states from leaving the EU.
Far from restoring stability to the country, the delay and uncertainty that revoking Article 50 and holding a second referendum would bring is the last thing the economy need.
It is doubtful there would even be time for another referendum within the time available but even if it could be shoehorned into the schedule.
Of course there is also the question that if we held another referendum, if there were people unhappy with the result of that one, would they then want another one, and so on until they got a result they were happy with? That isn’t how democracy works.
Time is running out and the vast majority of people tell me they simply want us to get on with things and leave.
I am committed to delivering the results of the referendum, nationally and locally, by ensuring that we leave the EU on 29 March 2019. It is vital for our democracy we respect the decision the British people made in 2016’s referendum and deliver what the people voted for.
Unless the Prime Minister is now able to renegotiate a better deal that actually takes back control of our laws, our trade and our sovereignty, when this deal is put before Parliament, as it currently stands, I will be voting against it.
So I agree with many of my constituents that this deal needs to be voted down.
However, these emails I have received proceed to state that "one thing is clear amidst the widespread uncertainty we face: leaving the EU would considerably disadvantage the U.K., placing us in a precarious and potentially disastrous position for years to come", and suggest that we revoke Article 50 and support a second referendum.
I fundamentally disagree with this assertion that the UK will be weaker outside of the EU.
Nobody has ever said that leaving the EU would be walk in the park. But we were also told by economists and other so-called experts in 2016 that our economy would take a bad hit if the country voted to leave the EU.
It is an understatement to say that these forecasts have proved to be misguided.
We now stand in a strong position to weather the challenges of Brexit as one of the world’s largest and most competitive economies.
Staying in the EU would bound us to continue sending billions of pounds to Brussels and undermine our Parliament's sovereignty to legislate in our country's interest.
Indeed, what we have seen in the negotiations so far is the inflexible, bureaucratic and heavy-handed approach from Brussels that has typified our relationship with them for the past 4 decades.
The EU negotiators have refused to acknowledge the genuine economic interests of the UK and the EU, and have instead become fixated on setting a precedent with Brexit to deter other member states from leaving the EU.
Far from restoring stability to the country, the delay and uncertainty that revoking Article 50 and holding a second referendum would bring is the last thing the economy need.
It is doubtful there would even be time for another referendum within the time available but even if it could be shoehorned into the schedule.
Of course there is also the question that if we held another referendum, if there were people unhappy with the result of that one, would they then want another one, and so on until they got a result they were happy with? That isn’t how democracy works.
Time is running out and the vast majority of people tell me they simply want us to get on with things and leave.
I am committed to delivering the results of the referendum, nationally and locally, by ensuring that we leave the EU on 29 March 2019. It is vital for our democracy we respect the decision the British people made in 2016’s referendum and deliver what the people voted for.
