May’s Brexit deal is an abject surrender
Widdecombe
A PRIMARY school in London cancelled a gay pride event which it had planned to hold in its playground. On the day it was scheduled 110 pupils did not turn up to school but what is really interesting is that of those 110, the parents of 90 provided no
LET there be no doubt. The PM’s proposed Brexit deal means we are not leaving the EU. We are staying in all but name, accepting the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and accepting EU trade rules.
So we are still in but this time without a say because technically we will be out and not entitled to one. It is not a deal: it is a surrender. Of course we need a trade deal with Europe but trade deals are about tariffs not courts and laws.
After months of infighting and posturing Mrs May succeeded in uniting her Cabinet for five minutes behind what can only be described as the politics of the shrug: oh well, if one way is too difficult then never mind, just take the easy way.
Never mind what the British people voted for in the referendum, never mind that America is talking about a no-tariff trade deal, never mind that Europe desperately needs us to go on importing from its major industries, never mind the migration and economic difficulties besetting the EU, let us just raise our hands in surrender because that’s easier.
THE wonder is not that there have been resignations but that anybody who voted Brexit could stay at all, let alone join as Dominic Raab has done. Just why are the likes of Liam Fox and Michael Gove waving the white flag?
Talk is now rampant of getting rid of Theresa May but any successor would still have no majority in the Commons thanks to her vanity project of an SADIQ KHAN is a nincompoop to agree to a highly insulting balloon, mocking the President of the United States being flown during Donald Trump’s visit. It denigrates not the dignity of Trump’s high office but that of Khan’s. However what is inflated can be deflated. Does the SAS fancy a challenge? explanation for their offspring’s absence, obviously deciding that discretion was the better part of valour.
If parents cannot openly object to what their children are being taught (apparently children as young as eight were learning about election. Meanwhile she spouts grandiloquent rot such as “To lead is to decide” . Her rhetoric is bisexuality) and openly assert their own moral standpoint then we are indeed no longer a free country.
Politicians demand that parents take responsibility for their children but then will not let them take basic decisions such as when it is right for their offspring to all Churchill and Chamberlain.
Just give us what the British people voted for, Prime Minister. her heart is all
PARENTS MUST BE FREE TO DECIDE WHEN THEIR CHILDREN LEARN THE FACTS OF LIFE
be told what used to be called the facts of life.
While on the subject of parental responsibility I am becoming increasingly resistant to those mothers who whine that their children are addicted to computer games or phones or whatever. In some cases, even where there is real addiction, parents go on allowing their young to sit in front of the wretched devices in their bedrooms for hours on end. Oh, for goodness sake, just take the darn machines away. You’re the grown-ups around the place, aren’t you?