Mrs May’s poor leadership means that her terrible deal is now at risk of becoming even worse
SIR – Yesterday evening we had yet another uninspiring statement from Theresa May, showing no sign of leadership whatsoever.
The idea of her sitting down with Jeremy Corbyn to reach agreement on Brexit is laughable. More worrying is the possibility that we will end up remaining in the customs union if it proves to be the only solution acceptable to our lily-livered MPS. Peter Robinson
Guildford, Surrey
SIR – Mrs May stated that we have to concentrate on our future relationship with the EU.
No, Mrs May, Brexit is about our relationship with the rest of the world – not just the EU.
Why can’t the Prime Minister accept that her deal is a bad deal – which therefore means, as she herself once famously acknowledged, that no deal is the only way forward? Russ Hill
Radstock, Somerset
SIR – According to William Hague (Comment, April 2), “the case for Brexit is being lost”.
The case is not being lost: MPS are incapable of making it happen. The British public are entitled to see their decision being carried through. Patsie Goulding
Reigate, Surrey
SIR – We have very little to fear from a clean break from the EU. We are warned of apocalyptic consequences by large sections of the political class. The warnings come from all sides of the Brexit debate, but mostly from those who believe we should remain. These warnings are seldom, if ever, backed up by experience or reason.
Industry and commerce are poorly represented in Parliament. As someone who has been involved with business for over 50 years, in some 50 markets round the world, I would judge the risks of a clean break to be no more challenging than those I encounter in a normal business cycle.
We also hear little of the opportunities that a clean break offers – not least that of bringing to an end this dispiriting saga. Significantly, the consensus that seems to exist against the federalist ambitions of the EU is ignored by those wishing to remain. Unless we act decisively and soon, we will be absorbed into a super-state.
I ask MPS to take courage. Of course we understand that there are risks, but I believe we are up for it.
Lord Cavendish of Furness
Cark in Cartmel, Cumbria
SIR – This country is now in a terrible mess, largely because a significant number of our MPS do not represent the views of their constituents. A general election is the only solution.
However, while this may restore some balance to our political landscape it will not result in a deal with the EU, whose actions have made it quite plain that, unless we become a vassal state, leaving under World Trade Organisation rules is the only way to achieve a true Brexit. Richard Barcock
Seaford, East Sussex
SIR – What would be the point of a general election?
Both parties are split, and the factions within the parties are split too. Assuming that most MPS would stand again and be returned, we would end up in exactly the same position as we are in now. Given that all Conservative and Labour MPS were returned on pro-brexit manifestos, there are only two options: Theresa May’s deal or no deal. Malcolm Allen
Berkhamsted, Hertfordshire
SIR – It seems that there would be a clear parliamentary majority for Mrs May’s deal if the backstop clause were modified to make it time-limited or to allow it to be terminated unilaterally.
It is odd that this option has not been put forward as one of the indicative votes. If Parliament backed it, this would show the EU that there is an option that could gain consensus, which would place the onus on it to make some concessions. David Lloyd
Swindon, Wiltshire
SIR – Flora Poil, your new reporter, is closer to the truth in her April Fools’ joke than many may have suspected.
Although there is no Act of Parliament of 1653 prohibiting the issuing of false reports, there was a proclamation of the Privy Council in 1688 entitled: “Against spreading false news &c.” It has not always been the most efficacious edict.
Jacob Rees-mogg MP (Con)
London SW1