Were I the new British PM,...
xx July 2019
10 Downing Street
Death, destruction, and a long war... The world was in flames.
Recently, we and our present allies around the world, including Germany, commemorated the seventy-fifth anniversary of the invasion of Normandy, which for the western theatre of the Second World War was its great turning point.
Europe remembers. And with that memory in the decade following Germany's surrender and that of Japan's, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands came together and formed what would be the original core of what is now the European Union.
On 1 January 1973, the United Kingdom joined what is now the European Union, and on 5 June 1975, we voted in public referendum to remain a part of what is now the European Union.
Since that time, we have helped to mold and shape this new Europe, becoming an integral part of the best parts of its mission and purpose: to bring about a framework of the continued cessation of violence which had plagued the continent for centuries beyond count.
As laudable as that mission has been, the new Europe has not been perfect. And this imperfection has stoked the fires of controversy which, in 2015, finally came to a head with the UK government of the day calling for a public referendum such as was held in 1975, but with the simple question this time of if the UK wished to remain in the European Union.
This referendum has been heretofore the greatest democratic exercise ever held in our country, but one which has been proven to be imperfect in its own right not because of its result, but because of its execution.
By calling the referendum in the way that it did, the government of the day failed the British people. By electing not to make full preparations and plans in the case of a vote to leave the EU in advance of even calling for a fresh referendum, that government, failing to see the true nature of the will of the people failed those people and allowed certain interests to sell the the idea leaving the European Union would be tidy, quick, and at least somewhat painless.
It is impossible to gauge what sort of exit from the EU people had in mind save in broad terms: the answer to this question was as vague as that on the 2016 ballot paper.
On 23 June 2016 the people of the United Kingdom gave themselves the worst possible outcome: a narrow margin of victory for one side or another. Had the result been reversed with 51.89% of the votes cast in favor of 'Remain', the 'Leave' side would have been no less adamant in its opposition, and it is probable our present state of division and morass would be as much a reality as it has become in real-life. Had the vote to Leave been more on the lines of the 1975 referendum's 67% vote to enter the European Community, the resultant politics would have been far-smoother and the exit from the EU would have been done, for the disastrous mistake of triggering Article 50 would have been made with the same hastiness as it actually was.
Nevertheless, a vote is a vote, and the people did speak clearly, however narrow the margin of victory was. And had the government from 2016 onward been able to reach a way forward with the European Union favorable to a majority of the Commons, that would have been it, no matter what the situation with Northern Ireland would have been.
On three separate occasions, the House of Commons showed in crushing terms its displeasure with the government's attempts at putting a deal together with the EU, and we are at present left with no deal and a crashing out of Europe on World Trade Organization terms on 31 October of this year as statute law as well as the end of the last extension to the time period prescribed in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty the EU will give us.
The EU has made it clear time and time again it will not revisit the Withdrawal Agreement, and the House of Commons has made it clear time and time again it does not support the Withdrawal Agreement. With no clear parliamentary majority for any course of action whatsoever, and with the 31 October 2019 crash-out date looming, we have come to an impasse.
All avenues of parliamentary procedure, negotiation, and politics have come to nothing, and it is clear to me and to a majority of the country, I believe, crashing out without a deal would be for our country calamitous.
There is, however, what in colloquial and figurative terms is called the 'nuclear option'. A nuclear option is the road of last resort when all other methods of reaching a resolution have failed. And for our union, the nuclear option consists of the unilateral revocation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which is in my power as Prime Minister to carry out. We do not have time to put this question to Parliament before the summer recess, and once the recess is over, to have this question still hanging over our heads would be as irresponsible as anything that has happened in this process so far.
The unilateral revocation of Article 50 by itself would be undemocratic and would not help to bring together any semblance of political resolution to the question of remaining or leaving the European Union. Only by accompanying the revocation of Article 50 with a fresh referendum on the question of leaving or remaining in the EU can such a revocation be democratically justified.
The Withdrawal Deal negotiated by the previous government is dead. It has been voted down by the House of Commons three times and until it was pulled a last time was headed for a fourth defeat. It was always dead-on-arrival, and it will always be dead, and now it must be buried.
31 October 2019 is coming quickly. We do not have time to negotiate any sort of new agreement with the EU, and the EU is fully-resistant to such a move, anyway.
This letter serves as official notice to the European Union of the immediate Revocation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.
I shall today table a bill prescribing a 2nd referendum on leaving the European Union with the following ballot language: "Shall the United Kingdom leave the European Union on World Trade Organization terms?" with the ballot options being 'Leave' and 'Remain'.
Unlike the 2016 referendum, which was advisory-only, this referendum shall be legally binding and shall trigger Article 50 anew six years after the vote is certified. Hence, following a 'Leave' vote in the 2nd referendum, we will have six years followed by the triggering of Article 50, which will give us a total of eight years in which to prepare for the said exit from the European Union on WTO terms.
The spectre of a narrow vote one way or another is real. After all, we live in the Age of Trump, in which anything is possible. Therefore, the bill which has been tabled prescribes the following required voting margins for a 'Leave' vote to be successful:
1. Turnout of 75% of all eligible voters from the whole of the UK.
2. 75% of all votes cast being required for a successful 'Leave' vote.
3. 75% of all UK parliamentary constituencies voting in the affirmative with leave-majorities of 60%
4. 60% of all eligible UK voters voting in the affirmative
This 2nd referendum shall be held on 1 February 2022. I believe this will afford the relevant authorities more than ample time to prepare the required administrative efforts needed to pull off what I am confident will eclipse the 2016 referendum and will be the single-greatest democratic event in the history of the United Kingdom.
In advance of the referendum, my government shall begin immediately to make the preparations for an exit from the European Union on WTO terms and by 31 October 2020 will issue a full report on the impacts on our economy and country of a WTO exit from the EU. Thus, we will have nearly ten years to prepare for the putting into force the result of a 'Leave' vote in 2022. And we will need every bit of those ten years.
I know this elongates the Brexit misery and uncertainty even more. And I know for half the country, revoking Article 50 is more than an affront to all that is democratic. But in the light of the failure of our political processes to put together a withdrawal package that satisfies both the House of Commons and the European Union in the wake of the result of the 2016 referendum, I believe this to be the only logical, appropriate, and responsible course of action left to us.
The next two-and-a-half years will be busy. As we make preparations for a possible no-deal WTO withdrawal from the European Union, we will also soon after the referendum go into the campaign for the next General Election. This General Election will determine what government we will have as we move forward on the result of the legally-binding EU withdrawal referendum.
Since 2016, we have been beset by uncertainty. In at least the area of parliamentary and political processes, once Royal Assent is given for the bill just tabled, you will have your certainty as to the timetable of all that is to come and the chance to have your final say on a choice that will be binary, simple, and stark: No-Deal Brexit or Remain.
While this government makes preparations for a possible no-deal WTO exit, it is my prayer we, the people of the United Kingdom, will vote to Remain in the European Union and in future elect Members of the European Parliament who will stand vociferously for the many reforms and changes Europe must have it if is to continue to succeed. The world has changed since 1975, and with the United States turning inward and the rest of the world growing more dangerous, Europe gives us an opportunity for stability, safety, and continued prosperity.
Vote Remain.
xxxx
Prime Minister
10 Downing Street
Death, destruction, and a long war... The world was in flames.
Recently, we and our present allies around the world, including Germany, commemorated the seventy-fifth anniversary of the invasion of Normandy, which for the western theatre of the Second World War was its great turning point.
Europe remembers. And with that memory in the decade following Germany's surrender and that of Japan's, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands came together and formed what would be the original core of what is now the European Union.
On 1 January 1973, the United Kingdom joined what is now the European Union, and on 5 June 1975, we voted in public referendum to remain a part of what is now the European Union.
Since that time, we have helped to mold and shape this new Europe, becoming an integral part of the best parts of its mission and purpose: to bring about a framework of the continued cessation of violence which had plagued the continent for centuries beyond count.
As laudable as that mission has been, the new Europe has not been perfect. And this imperfection has stoked the fires of controversy which, in 2015, finally came to a head with the UK government of the day calling for a public referendum such as was held in 1975, but with the simple question this time of if the UK wished to remain in the European Union.
This referendum has been heretofore the greatest democratic exercise ever held in our country, but one which has been proven to be imperfect in its own right not because of its result, but because of its execution.
By calling the referendum in the way that it did, the government of the day failed the British people. By electing not to make full preparations and plans in the case of a vote to leave the EU in advance of even calling for a fresh referendum, that government, failing to see the true nature of the will of the people failed those people and allowed certain interests to sell the the idea leaving the European Union would be tidy, quick, and at least somewhat painless.
It is impossible to gauge what sort of exit from the EU people had in mind save in broad terms: the answer to this question was as vague as that on the 2016 ballot paper.
On 23 June 2016 the people of the United Kingdom gave themselves the worst possible outcome: a narrow margin of victory for one side or another. Had the result been reversed with 51.89% of the votes cast in favor of 'Remain', the 'Leave' side would have been no less adamant in its opposition, and it is probable our present state of division and morass would be as much a reality as it has become in real-life. Had the vote to Leave been more on the lines of the 1975 referendum's 67% vote to enter the European Community, the resultant politics would have been far-smoother and the exit from the EU would have been done, for the disastrous mistake of triggering Article 50 would have been made with the same hastiness as it actually was.
Nevertheless, a vote is a vote, and the people did speak clearly, however narrow the margin of victory was. And had the government from 2016 onward been able to reach a way forward with the European Union favorable to a majority of the Commons, that would have been it, no matter what the situation with Northern Ireland would have been.
On three separate occasions, the House of Commons showed in crushing terms its displeasure with the government's attempts at putting a deal together with the EU, and we are at present left with no deal and a crashing out of Europe on World Trade Organization terms on 31 October of this year as statute law as well as the end of the last extension to the time period prescribed in Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty the EU will give us.
The EU has made it clear time and time again it will not revisit the Withdrawal Agreement, and the House of Commons has made it clear time and time again it does not support the Withdrawal Agreement. With no clear parliamentary majority for any course of action whatsoever, and with the 31 October 2019 crash-out date looming, we have come to an impasse.
All avenues of parliamentary procedure, negotiation, and politics have come to nothing, and it is clear to me and to a majority of the country, I believe, crashing out without a deal would be for our country calamitous.
There is, however, what in colloquial and figurative terms is called the 'nuclear option'. A nuclear option is the road of last resort when all other methods of reaching a resolution have failed. And for our union, the nuclear option consists of the unilateral revocation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, which is in my power as Prime Minister to carry out. We do not have time to put this question to Parliament before the summer recess, and once the recess is over, to have this question still hanging over our heads would be as irresponsible as anything that has happened in this process so far.
The unilateral revocation of Article 50 by itself would be undemocratic and would not help to bring together any semblance of political resolution to the question of remaining or leaving the European Union. Only by accompanying the revocation of Article 50 with a fresh referendum on the question of leaving or remaining in the EU can such a revocation be democratically justified.
The Withdrawal Deal negotiated by the previous government is dead. It has been voted down by the House of Commons three times and until it was pulled a last time was headed for a fourth defeat. It was always dead-on-arrival, and it will always be dead, and now it must be buried.
31 October 2019 is coming quickly. We do not have time to negotiate any sort of new agreement with the EU, and the EU is fully-resistant to such a move, anyway.
This letter serves as official notice to the European Union of the immediate Revocation of Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.
I shall today table a bill prescribing a 2nd referendum on leaving the European Union with the following ballot language: "Shall the United Kingdom leave the European Union on World Trade Organization terms?" with the ballot options being 'Leave' and 'Remain'.
Unlike the 2016 referendum, which was advisory-only, this referendum shall be legally binding and shall trigger Article 50 anew six years after the vote is certified. Hence, following a 'Leave' vote in the 2nd referendum, we will have six years followed by the triggering of Article 50, which will give us a total of eight years in which to prepare for the said exit from the European Union on WTO terms.
The spectre of a narrow vote one way or another is real. After all, we live in the Age of Trump, in which anything is possible. Therefore, the bill which has been tabled prescribes the following required voting margins for a 'Leave' vote to be successful:
1. Turnout of 75% of all eligible voters from the whole of the UK.
2. 75% of all votes cast being required for a successful 'Leave' vote.
3. 75% of all UK parliamentary constituencies voting in the affirmative with leave-majorities of 60%
4. 60% of all eligible UK voters voting in the affirmative
This 2nd referendum shall be held on 1 February 2022. I believe this will afford the relevant authorities more than ample time to prepare the required administrative efforts needed to pull off what I am confident will eclipse the 2016 referendum and will be the single-greatest democratic event in the history of the United Kingdom.
In advance of the referendum, my government shall begin immediately to make the preparations for an exit from the European Union on WTO terms and by 31 October 2020 will issue a full report on the impacts on our economy and country of a WTO exit from the EU. Thus, we will have nearly ten years to prepare for the putting into force the result of a 'Leave' vote in 2022. And we will need every bit of those ten years.
I know this elongates the Brexit misery and uncertainty even more. And I know for half the country, revoking Article 50 is more than an affront to all that is democratic. But in the light of the failure of our political processes to put together a withdrawal package that satisfies both the House of Commons and the European Union in the wake of the result of the 2016 referendum, I believe this to be the only logical, appropriate, and responsible course of action left to us.
The next two-and-a-half years will be busy. As we make preparations for a possible no-deal WTO withdrawal from the European Union, we will also soon after the referendum go into the campaign for the next General Election. This General Election will determine what government we will have as we move forward on the result of the legally-binding EU withdrawal referendum.
Since 2016, we have been beset by uncertainty. In at least the area of parliamentary and political processes, once Royal Assent is given for the bill just tabled, you will have your certainty as to the timetable of all that is to come and the chance to have your final say on a choice that will be binary, simple, and stark: No-Deal Brexit or Remain.
While this government makes preparations for a possible no-deal WTO exit, it is my prayer we, the people of the United Kingdom, will vote to Remain in the European Union and in future elect Members of the European Parliament who will stand vociferously for the many reforms and changes Europe must have it if is to continue to succeed. The world has changed since 1975, and with the United States turning inward and the rest of the world growing more dangerous, Europe gives us an opportunity for stability, safety, and continued prosperity.
Vote Remain.
xxxx
Prime Minister
Comments
Post a Comment