Labour and the Conservatives: both in convulsions and awaiting revival under a credible leader
SIR – William Hague (Comment, June 28) writes: “Today’s convulsions in the Labour leadership are spectacular to behold. Their party could formally divide, or turn in on itself in a new and bitter leadership election of their own. But Tories would be wise not to write off a party with such deep roots, that might still reinvent itself with more credible leadership or reap the benefits of this new age of rebellion and discontent.”
For “Labour” substitute “Tory” and for “Tories” substitute “Labour”. Mike Hall Reading, Berkshire
SIR – There appears to be a hopeless impasse in the Labour Party. Looks like it’s time to create a new party. Avril Jessey Cobham, Surrey
SIR – Labour is mistaken in thinking that Jeremy Corbyn’s lacklustre support for Remain was partly to blame for the referendum result. There were plenty of vociferous Labour politicians spouting their views during the campaign. The party’s view was clear. The point is, we didn’t care. But what do I know? I’m just an uneducated thicko from the North-East. Lynn Jopling Cullercoats, Northumberland
SIR – Mr Corbyn’s detractors claim that his “seven out of 10” enthusiasm for the Remain campaign and the resulting defeat show he can’t lead the party to victory in a general election.
In fact, Mr Corbyn’s assessment of the referendum issue has proved to be particularly astute. The emerging “ReLeave” consensus suggests that we will be left with about 70 per cent of EU membership features. Alison Miller-Varey Carlisle, Cumbria
SIR – Many, if not all, of the benefits of the EU that the Remain campaign championed are desirable. Few, if any, require a supra-national layer of government to achieve them.
Other countries in the world cooperate and trade without such an expensive and bureaucratic organisation as the EU subverting their sovereignty. Furthermore, the EU’s political ambitions are increasingly creating tension between member states, and antagonising neighbours.
There has been a wave of exaggerated condemnation and panic in parts of the media about the referendum result. This shows complete disregard for the majority view that the UK should leave the EU. The short-term market turbulence is caused largely by the markets betting the wrong way, rather than any principled objection, and it will soon settle down. Then we will be able to focus on building a better future for the UK outside the EU.
Once negotiations are concluded, I hope that our Scottish friends will look at what has been achieved and decide to remain in the UK.
It is also to be hoped that other countries in the EU will follow the lead of the UK. All European nations could then come together in an association of goodwill, co-operation and free trade, without an additional layer of government.
I voted Leave. I am neither a racist nor a simpleton and resent the daily implications to the contrary. It is time for us all to embrace our decision and move forward. Nigel Dickinson High Wycombe, Buckinghamshire
SIR – David Cameron may have been incorrect when he told European leaders that a desire for control over our borders was the main reason for the Brexit vote.
According to Lord Ashcroft’s postreferendum polling, 49 per cent of Leavers gave as their main reason “the principle that decisions regarding the UK should be taken in the UK” – compared with 33 per cent citing control of our borders and immigration. Peter Crawford Sheffield, South Yorkshire SIR – Just for the record: we voted Leave because of Brussels control, unregulated immigration and our politicians ignoring us.
They’d better not make the same mistake again. J D Mortimer Great Harwood, Lancashire
SIR – I deeply resent the suggestion that Leave voters were mainly elderly, under-educated, racist bigots, or the marginalised poor.
Those known to me are solidly middle-class, middle-aged and welleducated. Our reasons were not mainly to do with immigration but with sovereignty, self-governance and deep reservations about the long-term viability of the EU experiment. Dr Richard Ormrod Burwash, East Sussex
SIR – I have never been a supporter of Ukip, but I watched with pride Nigel Farage’s defence in the European Parliament of the result of the referendum. There were boos and jeers, but also cheers and applause from many when he illustrated the flaws of the European Union and the reasons Britain voted to leave. Ray Lines Romsey, Hampshire
SIR – At the European Parliament, Mr Farage held an upside-down Union flag, meaning “We are in distress”. How appropriate. John Boniface Oxford
SIR – Already, there have been calls for Denmark, Sweden, the Netherlands, Austria, France and several others to hold EU referendums. A recent poll in Denmark found only 44 per cent of the population would vote to remain.
Britain should set up a North Atlantic Free Trade Association for countries to join as they leave the EU, inviting Canada, Norway, Iceland and Switzerland to join us as founding members.
The only way to reform Europe is to start again, with the principle that free trade is the birthright of every nation and does not require the sacrifice of sovereignty or political freedom. Thomas Bygott Oakington, Cambridgeshire
SIR – If the Conservative Party should end up appointing a leader who was not a supporter of Leave, then it will have proved, unequivocally, that it remains out of touch with the majority of the voting public. George Cockburn Bishop’s Castle, Shropshire
SIR – Jeremy Hunt is correct in saying “Britain must and will leave the EU,” but he said the opposite during the referendum campaign. So I don’t trust his talk of a second referendum. Or his motives.
“Norway Plus” has been rejected by the EU. Professor Alan Sked London School of Economics London WC2
SIR – Mr Hunt’s idea of negotiating a new deal to stay in the single market and then hold a second referendum has all the hallmarks of a stitch-up designed to keep Britain in the EU. What question had he in mind for a second referendum?
I hope the British people have sufficient nous not to be dragged into any second referendum stunt – as happened in Ireland – but to continue to press hard for Britain’s earliest possible exit from the EU. Ian Johnson Chelford, Cheshire
SIR – Are those MPs seeking to stand for prime minister, just to stop Boris Johnson, aware of his appeal across the country?
Unusually for a politician, he has bags of personality and a positive vision for Britain. It should be noted that at some point there will be a general election, and the Tories need wide appeal in order to win.
Now that the country has voted to leave the EU, surely our leader must be a supporter of Brexit, who can deal with very difficult negotiations and scaremongering from all directions. Helen Morris Ware, Hertfordshire
SIR – Mr Johnson’s statement that the vote for Brexit had nothing to do with immigration (Comment, June 27) is patent nonsense, as we in Lincolnshire can attest.
If he now intends to join David Cameron and his ilk as they gloat over the liberal multi-racial, multi-cultural melting pot that is modern Britain, then I want nothing to do with him.
Some Tory MP should speak out for our native British identity: not out of “bigotry”, but out of a simple love for his own people and their heritage, and what surely is a normal determination to preserve them from the destruction which now looms. D R Leadbetter Spalding, Lincolnshire
SIR – Theresa May, as Mr Cameron’s Home Secretary, was happy to cling to office while the level of immigration smashed the levels that the Prime Minister had promised. So she cannot expect to be taken seriously as a candidate for prime minister.
She knew that as long as we remained shackled to the EU she could not deliver the Government’s policy of controlled immigration. Ian Wallace Whitley Bay, Northumberland
SIR – What did you do in the war, Mrs May? John Goodman Hook, Hampshire
SIR – Given Brexit, if money is in short supply, let us focus on cuts rather than tax increases. HS2 must be stopped. D M Watkins Plaxtol, Kent
SIR – You report (June 28) Alex Salmond’s view that the Scottish Parliament has no veto on withdrawal from the EU. His view is at odds with that of Sir David Edward QC, the distinguished jurist and sometime judge of the European Court of Justice. Sir David gave his opinion to the EU committee of the Lords in a report published last month as The Process of Withdrawing from the European Union.
On page 19, he is definite in his view that Section 29 of the Scotland Act entails that consent would be required from the Edinburgh Parliament. The committee’s view (also page 19) is that similar consent would be needed from the Cardiff and Stormont assemblies.
However desirable it may be to want a greater degree of sovereignty for the United Kingdom, that goal should not be sought at the expense of national unity. Article 50 should not be invoked before the means of preserving the United Kingdom are considered.
To that end a national gathering along the lines of the 1914 Buckingham Palace Conference on Home Rule should be called. CDC Armstrong Belfast
SIR – I travelled by train through Europe as an 18-year-old in 1959. To all of us young people then, Europe was a continent that we were part of. We didn’t feel any different from any other young people.
By forcing us to be “one” the EU has done more to divide us than unite us. Tricia Carr Shaldon, Devon
SIR – Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the European Commission, has said that “the British vote has cut off one of our wings, but we are still flying”. Presumably the direction is round and round in circles. Nick Moulton-Thomas Muscat, Oman