Sir, – The Brexit terms delivered by the EU 27 are not new. These terms are that the UK must abide by all regulations and accept free movement for the two years during the so-called Brexit transition.
They were spelled out in a 15-page progress report agreed between the EU Commission and the UK Government last December.
Paragraph 49 explained that the UK is committed to leaving the single European Market and the customs union, while “avoiding a hard border.” Even if no agreement can be reached, the UK “will maintain full alignment with those rules of the internal market and the customs union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 [Good Friday] Agreement.”
Paragraph 50, insisted on by Northern Ireland’s DUP, states there will be “no new regulatory barriers” between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK and that the UK “will continue to ensure the same unfettered access to Northern Ireland’s businesses to the whole of the United Kingdom internal market.”
This is effectively a pledge for a “soft Brexit”, i.e. the UK leaving the single market and customs union, while securing a deal that gives unfettered access to European markets.
Mrs May has essentially agreed that this means accepting EU trade rules, with all that this implies for other aspects of EU legislation.
The Tories are embroiled in factional warfare over Brexit so severe that a leadership challenge is imminent.
I predict the final outcome of the Brexit negotiations will be brutal and unbalanced – Brexit is the disease of the mind of the nasty Tory right.
The outcome will mean nothing will change, other than the UK will have even less relevance than it did before Brexit.
Alan Hinnrichs.
2 Gillespie Terrace,
Dundee.
Dreams of Walter Mitty
Sir, – Your correspondent Martin Redfern’s contribution (“Tax stance can boost Tories”, Letters, January 31) reminded me of the fictional character Walter Mitty, played by Danny Kaye, who used to seek refuge in an imaginary world to escape the realities of life.
Firstly he describes the SNP’s recent minor seat losses as a “drubbing” and goes on to console himself with a choice of words to suggest that support for an independent Scotland is flatlining. He also says the recently proposed modest tax increases to help the less fortunate in our society will increase support for the party he supports, because it is the only one to oppose help for the needy.
He closes by suggesting that the Tories are led by, of all things, a media-savvy Ruth Davidson who continually fails to hit the heights at FMQS at Holyrood.
To reach this conclusion it seems he mistakes the bellow and bluster of incorrect information for some form of political finesse.
Perhaps he should be more concerned about the latest poll detailing voting intentions for the next Scottish parliamentary election, which indicates that both Labour and Tory seats will once again revert to the SNP, which will regain full control at Holyrood.
Allan A. MacDougall.
37 Forth Park,
Bridge of Allan.
Time for Labour soul-searching?
Sir, – Are there undercurrents of racism and Islamophobia within Scottish Labour’s membership that need to be tackled?
I couldn’t disagree with much of what Jenny Hjul wrote (“We need to talk about this”, The Courier, January 31)about the complaints made by Anas Sarwar MSP, the unsuccessful candidate in the party’s recent leadership election, regarding racist comments made by a member of his own party, regarding Mr Sarwar’s candidacy.
It is still necessary to stress a few points.
I doubt if Mr Sarwar’s claims, if proved to be accurate, were the cause of his defeat.
I believe he identified himself too closely with the Blairite outlook within Labour at a time when this is unfashionable.
The victor, Richard Leonard, was able to exploit his own close links with the trade unions and his reputation as a Jeremy Corbyn acolyte to best effect.
More worrying is what the person who offended Mr Sarwar so much is alleged to have said about the views of constituents.
It is a time-honoured ploy among the bigoted and narrow-minded to say that “it’s no’ me, it’s what other people might think’’.
He may genuinely feel that many people inclined to support Labour are opposed to the idea of a Muslim of Pakistani descent leading the party.
If that is the case then the “people’s party’’ does need to take along hard look at itself.
If some of its local leaders do believe that, then we have to ask how useful legislation on equality passed over the last half century has been.
It may well be the time for Labour to look very closely at its own attitude, and the attitude of some of its supporters, toward race and immigration.
Bob Taylor.
24 Shiel Court,
Glenrothes.
Time to ring-fence pensions
Sir, – First Carillion, then Capita, with pension funds taking a hit, as ever. Who’s next?
Why has HM Government failed to ring-fence pension funds, to keep them beyond the grasp of greedy speculators and asset-strippers?
Have we learned nothing from (Still “Sir”) Philip Green? Come to think of it, have we learned nothing from Robert Maxwell?
Time for some evidence of action from our Westminster rulers, what?
James Stevenson.
Drummond Avenue,
Auchterarder.
SNP should stick to its day job
Sir, – I refer to the letter from Les Mackay (“Let England go its own way”, January 31) in which he expresses support for a second Brexit referendum.
This would see Scotland and Northern Ireland remain in the EU, while England and Wales exited.
Mr Mackay seems to have a short memory.
When, in the run-up to the independence referendum in 2014, Alex Salmond and his ministers trundled around the principal capitals of EU member states to drum up support for fast-track Scotland membership when the SNP won the referendum, they were all politely shown the door.
The EU will not support the fragmentation of sovereign nations.
It is the UK that is negotiating a new relationship with the EU (and not before time) and the SNP should butt-out from its constant insistence that it somehow has superior negotiating rights. Instead it should concentrate on the challenges of its devolved government responsibilities.
Derek Farmer.
Knightsward Farm,
Anstruther.
Follow the Swiss example
Sir, – The enforcement of a new Swiss civil rights act is cracking down on the nation’s refugee and migrant crisis which has been draining taxpayers’ funds for years.
Applicants who have received welfare over the last three years will only be considered for Swiss citizenship if they return the money. The new act also requires migrants to demonstrate a greater level of integration in Swiss society, including friendships with Swiss people.
A lesson here for soft-touch Britain and its dithering, complacent but well-paid politicians.
Clark Cross.
138 Springfield Road,
Linlithgow.
