Com­pro­mise over the EU is not a bad thing

Gloucestershire Echo - - NEWS -

✒ I HAVE sym­pa­thy with Alex Chalk MP when he talks of com­pro­mise re­gard­ing the Brexit ne­go­ti­a­tions.

Al­though dev­as­tated when I woke the morn­ing af­ter the ref­er­en­dum in 2016, I thought there would be ne­go­ti­a­tion and com­pro­mise be­tween the UK gov­ern­ment and the EU which would re­sult in a re­spect­ful re­la­tion­ship which would en­able the trad­ing of goods and al­low the UK service in­dus­try, which re­lies heav­ily on trade within the EU, to con­tinue.

I thought there might be joint work­ing in other im­por­tant ar­eas such as re­spect­ing and guar­an­tee­ing the rights of EU cit­i­zens, se­cu­rity, climate ac­tion and the pro­mo­tion of con­tin­ued peace­ful work­ing re­la­tion­ships.

I was pre­pared for these de­ci­sions and com­pro­mises.

But as Mrs May drew her red lines, showed a lack of re­spect for EU na­tion­als liv­ing in the UK and her rhetoric started about ‘No Deal is bet­ter than a Bad Deal’ I be­gan to re­alise that as one of the 48 per cent who voted to re­main , this sig­nif­i­cant per­cent­age was go­ing to be discounted as Mrs May tried to sat­isfy the ERG and the more right wing el­e­ments in her party.

More in­for­ma­tion be­came avail­able, that the ref­er­en­dum vote, in my opin­ion, was com­pro­mised due to fund­ing of the Leave cam­paigns, use of per­sonal data and deliberate mis­in­for­ma­tion.

Brexit was pre­sented as eas­ily doable and ben­e­fi­cial to the UK in so many ar­eas - the ex­act op­po­site has proved to be the case and it is prov­ing to be very much more com­pli­cated and detri­men­tal.

I have no rec­ol­lec­tion of a no deal Brexit be­ing men­tioned dur­ing cam­paign­ing - it was all about how easy it would be to get a ‘great deal.’

So in Mr Chalk’s words I am now an ‘ul­tra re­mainer.’

My dear­est wish is to wake up to find Ar­ti­cle 50 has been re­voked so the UK can get on with sort­ing out the do­mes­tic is­sues that need at­ten­tion and move out of this Brexit night­mare.

Unlike ul­tra brex­i­teers, I do not think the means jus­tify the ends. I think democ­racy is served bet­ter by hav­ing a se­cond vote on any deal or no deal op­tion, along with an op­tion to re­main in the EU.

Surely this is com­pro­mise given the ques­tions around as­pects of the first vote, that we have had time to un­der­stand the con­se­quences of leav­ing the EU and we have a more ac­cu­rate idea of the very many ben­e­fits of re­main­ing. Sarah Mo­liver Chel­tenham

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.