Brexit reply
I fail [again] to understand Keith Tunstall’s [CO. 22 Feb 2024] pro-eu stance if for him France and Germany “are the right ones”. As the ‘World Economic
Forum’ asked in 2015,
‘What ever happened to EU subsidiarity?’ (www. weforum.org) Keith Tunstall appears to be championing Remain for the UK but then championing ‘Fredexit’ of
France and Germany.
As for me not ‘claiming a single plus for Brexit’, you generously gave me two full page columns to ‘an analysis of the issues’. But Keith Tunstall shows his “disinterest, disinclination, or contempt” (www. wordreference.com) of analysis with his “So what”.
Also, if for Keith Tunstall it was “foolish to have a referendum on such complex issues”, then this subverts the Electoral Commission which has said “the [Referendum] question was written in plain language and was easy for people to understand and answer.” (www.electoralcommission. org.uk)
And to say “the issue is whether Brexit is proving good for us” depends on what is meant by ‘Brexit’. It was Parliament and government negotiators who could not understand the “plain language” of the question which was voted on. Some parliamentarians refused to accept that ‘Leave the European Union’ meant ‘Leave the European Union’ and arrogated that plainness of language to keeping close to or even remaining in the EU.
Speaking in September 2019, Prof. Tara Mccormack went so far as to say, “I would argue that we have a profound political and constitutional crisis in Britain, but it is not the vote in favour of leaving the EU that has caused it. It is a crisis which is caused by MPS refusing to carry out the vote.” (dcubrexitinstitute.eu) The House of Commons Library records this as ‘People vs Parliament’. “According to Hanretty’s model, Leave would have won a majority of the votes in 421 constituencies and Remain in 152. Matching his [Hanretty’s] constituency predictions up to available data on MPS voting intentions suggests 30
MPS voting Leave and 292 MPS voting Remain were at odds with the majority of their constituents.” (commonslibrary. parliament.uk)
So it is disingenuous [again] for Keith Tunstall to ask me to name ‘a single plus for Brexit’ when this ‘Brexit’ is the legacy of ‘Parliament’ holding in contempt the ‘People’.