Can Theresa May maintain that the draft Brexit agreement gives the country what it voted for?
SIR – Might I suggest that Theresa May simply considers this: when you are gone, will you have given our next generation what this country voted for? Mike Middlebrook
Hythe, Kent
SIR – The only certainty about “the deal” is that it will be disadvantageous for Britain. John Clark
Southampton
SIR – How were members of the Cabinet expected to read a 500page, complicated document and understand it in a few short hours? Gerald Penney
Teignmouth, Devon
SIR – I voted Remain, but I am solidly behind Theresa May’s policy, because the referendum result favoured Brexit and she was left with no choice but to do her best to comply with that result.
Brexiteers may well not be satisfied with what Mrs May has come up with. I am afraid, however, that it would be quite impossible to push the people in Brussels any further. This is why I am still convinced it would be best if we remained. Patrick Evershed
President, Cities of London and Westminster Conservatives London SW1
SIR – This is not Brexit; it is serial capitulation. The European Commission has in the past destroyed the Greek economy, sacrificed the future of the young people of southern Europe, and is preparing to oversee the collapse of the Italian economy. It is now ready to humiliate British democracy, putting at risk the well-being of exporters and the supply chains of the aerospace, motor and food industries of continental Europe.
Its leaders treat with contempt the lives of three million continentals in Britain, and a million Britons on the Continent. They have cynically poured acid into the healing wound of Ulster, to add to the pressure.
We must dump the appeasers and rally behind a leader that believes in Brexit and the decision of the British people, with the guts to implement it. Jacques Arnold
President, Tonbridge & Malling Conservative Association West Malling, Kent
SIR – Remainers are unhappy because we will continue to pay billions to the EU, but will have no control.
Brexiteers are unhappy because we will continue to pay billions to the EU, but will have no control.
The EU is very happy because we will continue to pay it billions, but will have no control. Rob Turnbull
Hutton Rudby, North Yorkshire
SIR – It is unfortunate that attention is focused on the short-term impact of Brexit.
Brexit is not about what happens over the next three or four years but about the system of governance for Britain for the next three or four centuries – whether we are an independent democracy with an elected government or an outer region of a single European state governed by an unelected, unaccountable, self-perpetuating bureaucracy. David A Baggaley
Totnes, Devon
SIR – If the Prime Minister proceeds with her plan, it will be a betrayal of the Brexit vote.
Big business, the CBI, the Treasury, the International Monetary Fund and the politicians will have won and destroyed the freedoms demanded by the people.
Our only hope will be in the future collapse of the democratically corrupt EU under the weight of its own bureaucracy and economic mismanagement. Dr Gary Vanstone
Bradstone, Devon
SIR – Mrs May is fighting for her political life. But, in this national crisis, that is of no importance compared to the life of the nation. She must go, and instead we need a national government (including Labour) to resist the naked aggression of the EU. Rev Philip Foster
Hemingford Abbots, Huntingdonshire
SIR – On Tuesday I received an email from my local Conservative Party asking if I would volunteer to deliver leaflets. Prescient, I wonder? Trevor Jones
West Chiltington, West Sussex
SIR – If Mrs May and the Conservatives are counting on the fear of a Corbyn government to push through what looks like a complete betrayal of Brexit, they are sadly mistaken.
As a lifelong Conservative, I would rather risk a Corbyn government than support the proposed “deal”.
Not only will Mrs May be remembered as the prime minister who destroyed Britain’s future, but she will also damn the Conservatives to the opposition benches for a generation – and rightly so.
Major Mike Mckone (retd)
Kirkby Stephen, Cumbria
SIR – I have just finished reading Douglas Hurd’s excellent book on Robert Peel.
As prime minister, Peel wished to repeal the Corn Laws out of concern for poor people who had no benefits from these laws. They lived in extreme poverty and often endured famine. He went against important members of the Tory party, who as major landowners benefited from the laws. This divided the party for a long time, with landowners against him and ordinary people in agreement.
Mrs May is supporting people who benefit from our membership of the EU, often financially. The majority of ordinary people voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum, as they derive no real benefit from the EU and regard it as a burden on our country and independence.
Her present proposal appears to defeat the result of that referendum. This will also divide the Conservative Party – with people who benefit in agreement with her and ordinary members against her. Brian A Hardy-bishop
Shanklin, Isle of Wight
SIR – We are living through the greatest humiliation this nation has experienced in modern times, and our Prime Minister is the one to blame.
Her actions are so bizarre that it seems some unseen force with a stranglehold over her is dictating what she says and does. She has blatantly gone back on things she has repeated time and again during the past two and a half years.
She is encouraging the break-up of the UK and jeopardising its sovereignty. She must not be allowed to drag us down this disastrous path. Bernard Gallivan
Edinburgh
SIR – I fail to see how Boris Johnson could possibly achieve a better deal, bearing in mind he has to negotiate with the soft Brexiteers, Remainers, the Labour Party, Liberal Democrats, the DUP, the SNP, the business fraternity and, of course, the EU. All of these factions have their own agendas; hence the complexity of trying to find a deal that suits all parties. Anthony Haslam
Farnham, Surrey
SIR – Does anyone seriously believe that the solution to the Irish border question, which has eluded the best brains these past two years, is miraculously going to be discovered in the years ahead, regardless of the length of any transition period? Christopher Gill
Bridgnorth, Shropshire
SIR – The proposed withdrawal agreement contains concessions from our side, as expected.
However, the one concession we must not make is to lose the ability to control our own destiny by striking trade deals with other countries around the world.
If we gain our independence in this respect, Brexit will be a success. Brussels is aware of this, and fears that a UK success story will encourage others to follow. Mike Mogridge
Henley-on-thames, Oxfordshire
SIR – Britain should not pay any money to the EU until a suitable trading arrangement is agreed, and should not pay any additional money after 2021 under any circumstances. John Robert
Oxshott, Surrey
SIR – Professor Angus Gellatly (Letters, November 14) makes an interesting point about the influence that small changes in wording have on how people think.
However, he uses the same kind of trick to imply that the 2016 referendum was the second such vote on the same question. It was nothing of the kind.
In 1975, we voted to remain in the Common Market, which was something that we would be delighted to join or remain in today.
The 2016 referendum was our first opportunity to vote to leave the EU, a political construct that has relentlessly eroded the sovereignty of this nation and which the citizens of this country never voted to join. James Maxwell
Farnham, Surrey
SIR – It is disingenuous of Professor Gellatly to claim there a was a 34 per cent majority for remaining in the EU in 1975. At the time we voted for membership of a customs union, not the unaccountable political behemoth it has become. David Nunn
West Malling, Kent
SIR – Even if there is agreement to form a European army, it will not be recognisable as such. It will have no designated corps, divisions or brigades, no communications and logistic support, no assigned artillery and no joint training with naval and air forces. There will be no uniform and you won’t be able to go into a recruiting office and join it. At best, nations will earmark existing formations, committed to other tasks, on a distant notice to move.
However, there will be a headquarters. It will be full of Dutch and German generals with no military experience. It will look and feel important and it will be expensive. It is hard to imagine it being commanded by anyone who has ever fired a shot in anger.
Perhaps this needn’t concern us after March but it seems inevitable that the money and effort to make this work would have to come at the expense of the existing excellent and well-drilled Nato headquarters in Europe. That would be a tragedy. Mark Rayner
Eastbourne, East Sussex
SIR – At the Armistice centenary, President Emmanuel Macron of France called for a European army. Now Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany is championing its creation.
What will be the common language of this proposed army – German? Pamela R Goldsack
Banstead, Surrey
SIR – Please could there be a moratorium on the ubiquitous word delivered? Babies and the post are delivered. Brexit may be implemented. Charles Foster
Chalfont St Peter, Buckinghamshire