Fight looms over key panel to oversee EU withdrawal

A FIERCE row is brewing over the make-up of a powerful new Brexit committee after Tory MPs demanded that pro-Leave campaigners make up the majority of the all-party panel.

Eurosceptics said pro-EU colleagues must not use the committee to “challenge” the Brexit referendum result and warned of “political war” if it was used to subvert the people’s will.

Up to 21 MPs will be elected this week, including 10 Tories and six from opposition parties, to join the panel chairman, Labour’s Hilary Benn, who backed the campaign to stay in the EU.

Leave campaigners said MPs who call for Britain to stay in the single market should not be elected to the panel, which is intended to scrutinise the Government’s approach to Brexit.

One Eurosceptic MP said: “What’s going on at the moment is a tremendous political war to avoid actually leaving the EU. When [Remainers] say we need to stay in the single market what they are really doing is trying to prevent actual exit from the EU, because if you are in the European Economic Area you are subject to the jurisdiction of the EU and that is just not Brexit.”

Andrew Rosindell, Tory MP for Romford, warned that if the committee is used to challenge Brexit “we’ve got rocky times ahead”. Fellow Tory Anna Soubry said the panel’s work was not about Remain versus Leave, but “how we get the best deal for our country”.

SIR – The EU’s difficulties in arranging trade agreements with the United States and Canada suggest that it is unlikely to agree on a deal with an insurgent Britain – especially when Britain is no longer willing to accept hundreds of thousands of EU migrants seeking refuge from a European employment wasteland.

However, there is no need for years of fruitless negotiations. Britain should opt for a realistic Brexit, leaving the EU as soon as we are ready and abolishing the external EU tariffs. Britain should concentrate on forging trade agreements with those countries that do not consider free trade to be just another Anglo-Saxon bêtise. Gerald Heath Corsham, Wiltshire

SIR – In conducting the Brexit negotiations, the EU will find itself having to choose between two priorities: creating a European state and promoting the prosperity of its citizens. Creating a European state implies a degree of economic protection from other states, in order to encourage EU industries to integrate into Europe-wide entities. Many other states (England and France in the 18th century, Germany and the United States in the 19th century) have been through such a phase.

However, this would conflict with advancing the prosperity of EU citizens. The world’s economic system is now so interlocking that no form of protection is rational. Britain’s task is to press the point until it is conceded. Anthony Pick Newbury, Berkshire

SIR – With elections looming in France and Germany – both of which may reveal less EU-friendly electorates – and another potential euro crisis, Britain could be leading the way in being prepared to go it alone.

Those countries that try to give us a hard time may be on the receiving end if they are left without the EU in future. Harry L Barker North Berwick, East Lothian SIR – The EU wants Brexit negotiations to be in French (report, October 22).

What about Polish, Greek or any other language? Why not Latin, within which are the origins of most European languages – and which, more to the point, our Foreign Secretary can actually speak?

The sooner we are divorced from this ludicrous EU the better. Iain Lang Dumfries

SIR – Theresa May’s refusal to negotiate Brexit in French symbolises Britain’s deluded self-importance. This is based partly on a linguistic dominance that we no longer – and perhaps never did – deserve.

English is a wonderful language, but it is one of many wonderful languages. The fact that it is the language of finance, travel and commerce masks how few of us are fluent in “other” languages and cultures. And that’s dangerous, with or without Brexit. Sue Primmer London E14