Brexiteers demand final referendum
May's commitment to the EAW shows that Brexiteers need a final referendum not remoaners.
Unhappiness, St Augustine tells us, is wanting evil things - and getting them.
Brexit social media groups these days are dominated by two themes: Abolish the House of Lords and oppose any final referendum.
Both have dangers we should consider - no matter how boring it is to consider dangers when you are having fun, as Augistine also sort of said.
It could well be that, within months, it is our side who are deperately calling for a referendum on the A50 deal that May's Provisional Government presents to Britain. A "WTF do you call this?" referendum. A "This is not good enough" referendum. Really, what if Mrs May's definition of Brexit is not ours?
We have heard, with great jubilation, that there will be no accepting a single market in labour units (formerly known as people) as a price for access to the single market in goods. But alarm is already growing about what may be accepted. To what extent will we still be in the EU?
Everyone wants some, normal, level of cooperation and, even, integration. In education and academia and research, few people see a problem. No one has an isue with men of letters coming from France, for instance.
For some weeks concerns have been raised about the line on EU access to fishing waters. And there is another problem, which the Bruges Group at least has addressed some weeks ago: European Arrest Warrant. In recent days EAW has become news.
There is a real chance that this government will present an A50 deal that we cannot accept. It was Mrs May herself when Home Secretary who, without so much as a debate in parliament, abandonned the much acclaimed Justice and Home Affairs opt-out of the European Arrest Warrant. The same proposal was made in Denmark, there was a referendum and the people triumphed and kept the opt-out. No EAW.
This Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, has actually said that UK should keep the European Arrest Warrant. Maybe I am confused - so let there be a clear declaration so that all confusion is removed. Mrs May needs to admit she was wrong then and for proper Brexit now. No EAW.
Jacob Rees-Mogg MP said, again on a video on Bruges Group, that the EAW was reason on its own to leave the EU. Then surely EAW is reason enough to reject any A50 deal that includes it. But Jacob said (in response to msm questions about Rudds position) that any involvement of the ECJ would not be proper Brexit - but that sounds less than the kind of forthrightness we would expect from him.
We should not be campaigning to trust whatever the May government produces - to trust, whatever - but instead we should be the ones demanding that there should be a final referendum to reject semi-Brexit.
The Brexit movement is now saying we should trust and accept Mrs May's deal no matter what. This is insane. Trust Mrs May??? Give your head a shake!
People should not confuse a second referendum, a replay referendum, a best of three referendum with a final referendum. Are we really proposing that the British people should live by what May and Hammond decide with Guy Verhofstadt and Juncker? (or whoever it is) And that we should have no judgement? Really?
We would be bloody stupid to have such blind faith - demand a final referendum now!