Mrs May has ceded control over Brexit to those determined to thwart it
SIR – Liz Truss claims that Theresa May’s Brexit deal “gives people control over the destiny of our country” (Sunday Comment, January 6).
In fact, it does nothing of the kind. As her fellow Conservative MP, Sir William Cash, writes of Mrs May’s deal (in an article in the newspaper on the same day), not only will we not regain control of our own sovereignty – for the first time in our history, we will be governed, perhaps indefinitely, by laws imposed upon us by the other 27 member states of the EU. We will have no say in the creation of those laws, or how they are administered.
Worse still, the May deal would undermine the constitutional status of Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom. Could anything be more opposed to “giving people control over the destiny of our country”?
Downham Market, Norfolk
SIR – The one time that the people were seemingly given full control, at the 2016 referendum, they voted for Brexit. Now the Government, of which Liz Truss is a part, has all but ceded control of the process to EU officials and, following this week’s machinations in the Commons, to MPs and to a Speaker determined to thwart the will of the people.
SIR – We need a civil disobedience campaign for 17.4 million people.
SIR – Mrs May says that the rejection of her Brexit deal would see the country moving into “uncharted territory”, as if this is a terrifying prospect.
But boldly moving into uncharted territory was precisely how Britain built the largest empire in the world. We need only to rekindle that spirit of enterprise, and the world may yet be our oyster. Victor Osborne London W5 SIR – I fear that Christopher Booker (The Last Word, January 6) misunderstands the perceived problems that would arise at Dover in the event of a no-deal Brexit.
There are enough lorries to carry the freight and enough ships to carry the lorries: we will not need more of either since the tonnage of goods will be the same as now.
The flow rate through customs is the problem, and this is determined by the attitude and effectiveness of the customs authorities. Calais is in fierce competition with other north European ports; the French local district governor and the port director have both said they will do everything possible to ensure a speedy throughput at the port, and continental farmers will not countenance their produce being delayed and consequently destroyed.
Thus, the apparently silly award of a shipping contract to a company with no ships should be of little concern. GW Corfield