May has violated the electoral manifesto and her Lancaster House speech

Created on: 10th July 2018

The Chequers Plan is still-born. Theresa May cannot command a Tory majority in Parliament for her fatal compromise. The votes can be found only by turning to the opposition, and that way lies Sir Robert Peel and the schism of 1846.

The Prime Minister overplayed her hand disastrously by trying to bounce the Cabinet and the Parliamentary party into support for a settlement that violates the electoral manifesto, the Lancaster House speech, the verdict of the referendum, and the minimum conditions of sovereign self-government.  

An entirely new Brexit chapter is suddenly upon us. Anything is now possible. The spectrum ranges – by way of a snap election – from "Global Britain" on WTO terms at one end, to a Corbyn government at the other.

Markets are belatedly waking up to the enormity of this. There had been a view among currency traders that the resignation of David Davis would clear the way for an even softer Brexit, or partial EU membership without voting rights to be more accurate. Sterling briefly rallied. The departure of Boris Johnson hours later shattered that illusion.

Thirty Conservative MPs were in revolt even before the misjudged lock-in at Chequers. They now have two of Brexit’s Cabinet heavyweights in their camp, flanked by Jacob Rees-Mogg and the seventy-strong militia of the European Research Council. The floodgates have opened. It is surely only a matter of time before the requisite 48 letters needed to trigger a leadership race arrive at the 1922 Committee.

I do not wish to labour the details of the Chequers Plan. Martin Howe, QC, has already conducted a forensic analysis of what we know about this week’s White Paper. His verdict – all over the internet – is worth repeating:

“These proposals lead directly to a worst-of-all-worlds 'Black Hole' Brexit where the UK is stuck permanently as a vassal state in the EU’s legal and regulatory tarpit, still has to obey EU laws and ECJ rulings across vast areas, cannot develop an effective international trade policy, and has lost its vote and treaty vetoes rights.”

Yes, it pulls Britain out of the EU’s foreign policy sphere (Pillar 2), and "justice and home affairs" (Pillar 3). It remains to be seen how this squares with Mrs May’s Munich pledge in February to accept the writ of the European Court in dealings with Europol, Eurojust, and the European Arrest Warrant.

It removes the UK from the ambit of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. This was the mechanism by which the ECJ was acquiring jurisdiction over almost anything it wanted – in violation of Britain’s opt-out under Protocol 30 – and was the biggest single reason why I voted for Brexit. Hurrah for that.

Ambrose Evans Pritchard 

Your Comments

posted by Martin on 11-07-18

This woman needs to go. She has gone against the will of the people, her manifesto, her mansion house speech and article 50.

posted by Peter on 11-07-18

Theresa May is guilty of treason, according to many reader of the Telegraph. I agree and she should not only stand down but the Police should investigate her activities, her duties and responsibilities to serve the will of the people and not her own agenda. After all she is a paid servant.

posted by Sally on 11-07-18

What is the point of voting if our Government do not fulfil the wishes of the people. I have no confidence in this Government and especially the Prime Minister, who thinks she is above the law and the will of the people.

posted by Alison on 12-07-18

Peter quoted from the Telegraph that Theresa May was guilty of Treason. Although this seems a strong accusation, the meaning of treason is: the betrayal of a trust or confidence; breach of faith or treachery. This is exactly what she has done to our Country.

You can add your comment here