The ink has not even dried on the Withdrawal Agreement EU Council signature block than the alarm bells start sounding about its repercussions.


There you have it, the EU Council has quickly passed the Brexit Withdrawal Agreement and passed it back to our Prime Minister, Theresa May, with endorsement to help her get it through Westminster early next month.

And the only potential stopper in the form of Spain was quickly dealt with, when it was agreed that Gibraltar was not necessarily part of the deal. This ended up with Spain saying they'd won and May saying they hadn't – well that's cleared that up hasn't it – not!

Anyway, that should give you an idea of the scope of what else we've given away in this process, such as control over our armed forces, security and foreign policy as pointed out numerous times by Veterans for Britain. And yes it's all in the agreement but the Tories will not tell you that, nor Labour for that matter.

To cut through all the red tape, the upshot of this deal May is trying to flog to us is that we would have to do exactly as the EU says without having a seat at their table, while they dictated how we run our country until such time as they wanted to allow us to have a worse deal with them. That's it!

And Theresa May wants us to back it?!

Here's an example, it is being reported already that if France doesn't get its way on fishing grounds after the transition phase then it will force the UK into the Irish Backstop position to keep us in the transition customs union and unable to move until the UK relents.

And what do you think the position of Spain would be with respect to Gibraltar in this matter?

As former UKIP MEP Roger Helmer Tweeted:

"This is a stark warning. The EU can demand ANYTHING AT ALL, and hold us hostage until we agree."

That should set the alarm bells ringing across the land!

What really grips me is that there are no stories flying about regarding all those Tory MPs flooding the 1922 chairman with letters of no confidence in their leader – because it ain't happening! You cannot trust the Tories to put the national interest first!

Now, while today's pantomime has been playing out, the Independent is ramping up the case for declaring the 2016 EU referendum result void.

It says that the recent allegations against the co-founder of Leave.EU, Arron Banks, coupled with the government's "…refusal to recognise the gravity of what is being exposed" has turbo-charged the case.

It says that the High Court could rule on whether or not to declare the EU referendum result void before Christmas.

And because the referendum result 'informed' the government and parliament of what the electorate wanted, that would ultimately mean any Brexit decision by the PM and/or parliament was based on a lie so:

"The order by the prime minister to trigger Article 50 and negotiate to leave the EU could be declared void." Says Ewan McGaughey, a senior law lecturer at King’s College London.

Now as I understand it there are two different aspects to this.

Firstly there are allegations that criminal activity took place – that is one case.

Then, if there was proven criminal activity that would mean that a second case for judicial review against the government decision would have to be brought.

But the Independent article says:

"The case will argue that Brexit must be declared void and the notification of Article 50 quashed, because 'various criminal offences may have been committed'."

What they appear to be doing here is putting the cart before the horse. The judicial review case is coming before any crime has actually been proved.

So, we're supposed to have a case where a court rules to stop Brexit on the basis that criminal offences 'may' have been committed. Not 'have been committed as proved by a court of law and a jury decision'. No, because offences 'may' have been committed.

What those bringing this case seem to be trying to do is void the biggest democratic vote in the history of the UK, on the basis that crimes might, or indeed might not, have been committed.

What if this case was successful and then the criminal case against Arron Banks or any others for that matter collapsed? How would that then erroneous court decision and the decision to reverse Brexit, be itself reversed? Well you can already foresee what the Remainers would say about that!

Also, because the two main parties, Labour and Conservative, fought the 2017 general election with the manifesto promise of obeying the wishes of the people as shown by the 2016 referendum, does that also mean that the last general election was also void?

Where does it stop?

And while this goes on there is the case of allegations against the winner of the South Thanet seat and his team in the 2015 general election, where the Tory, Craig Mackinlay, beat the then UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, to the seat.

This court case is ongoing and is only being reported locally in Kent, now I wonder why that is.

Anyway, if the premise that a crime 'may' have been committed is applied here, then surely the election for this particular seat could also be voided?

Thank goodness that the bar is quite a high one to be successful in judicial review.

At the end of the day, all I can say is:

Chuck Chequers, Toss Theresa and Welcome WTO!

So, please let us all know what you think by leaving a comment below.

And thank you for watching.


Despite Brexit, the Government has covertly signed us up to the EU's defence agenda

Comment Here!