So, I'm not the only one that thinks it'll be a last ditch battle between a WTO exit from the EU or Remaining in it.


For the last few days I've been laying out why I think, at the end of the day, the Brexit battle will culminate in our politicians in Westminster opting either for a full no-deal WTO Brexit or voting to Revoke the Article 50 notification thus reversing Brexit completely.

Now I see that James Ball, writing in the New European, has come to the same sort of conclusion.

But, whereas I want the UK to leave the EU and will happily take the WTO exit option, James Ball comes at it from the perspective of a Remainer.

He says in his piece that this may be the best opportunity to get a no Brexit result, even though the cards are currently stacked against remain, but he claims the pendulum is shifting towards them.

But where I disagree with him, is that he thinks a reversal of Brexit would be the result of parliament opting for a second referendum and the EU agreeing to extend Article 50, at which point Remain would have to swing into action to win the subsequent vote.

From my perspective there are several flaws with this.

Firstly, by directly opting for a second EU referendum the Establishment would be putting itself once again in the hands of an unpredictable electorate that is not currently best pleased with them.

Secondly, by agreeing to an extension of the Article 50 process, the EU would be opening itself up to more uncertainty – especially if it had no control over the question to be asked.

Why would it agree to that? A far better option for them would be to refuse the extension and tell the UK to use the new power it has of total revocation to reverse Brexit – it's your choice, they would say. After all, they could offer the extension at the last second of the last minute of the last hour, if they thought it in their interest anyway, couldn't they? But I think they'll conclude that it would be far better to get the UK to cave in on its own.

Now a lot of people get confused over, on the one hand extending the Article 50 process and on the other hand that of revoking the Article 50 letter that started the actual Brexit process itself.

Extending the Article 50 process just adds a number of months on, so instead of us leaving the EU on the 29th March next year, another date for Brexit could be set in say a month, or even in a year's time. This though has to be unanimously agreed by all the other EU27 member states, if just one of them says no, then there will be no extension. This makes it an uncertain option.

But revoking the Article 50 letter that we sent to Brussels, which told them we were leaving the EU, would stop Brexit altogether. It would be as if we never voted to leave and we would still be full and permanent members of the EU – no leaving. And the UK can do this on its own – it does not need anyone else to agree.

So you can see why the EU, our establishment and Remainers would prefer us to revoke the Article 50 letter, can't you?

And that's why I think it will end up being a binary choice between WTO (World Trade Organisation) and the full Remain caused by revoking the Article 50 letter. But how would that choice be forced on MPs to make, you ask?

First you ditch Theresa May's terrible deal.

Then with a WTO exit staring you in the face, you get government to cave in and look at the possibility of holding a referendum.

You then approach the EU who refuses to give you an Article 50 extension as discussed earlier.

As there's now not enough time for a Referendum prior to the 29th March Brexit day deadline, then it would be up to our Remain minded MPs in Westminster to choose between WTO or revoking Article 50. And neither a Tory leadership contest nor a general election changes anything – the choice would still be the same as there is no time to negotiate a deal with the EU once Theresa May's deal is thrown out.

The Remainers do though, have two big obstacles to getting a vote to go their way:

The first is to somehow overcome government stonewalling so as to force a legally binding vote on revoking Article 50.

And the second is to get the majority of MPs to then vote to frustrate the result of the 2016 referendum by ordering the government to revoke the Article 50 letter and so reverse Brexit.

And I think that will all come down to three main things:

Firstly, the cabinet itself needs to be dead set against a WTO exit.

Secondly, spin: they would just say revoking the Article 50 letter is a purely temporary measure, 'just stopping the clock, while we sort out a new referendum or another trade deal or whatever' they will lie.

And thirdly, the no deal Brexit fear mongering, which would be ramped up to a screeching fever pitch.

So if the cabinet bottles it over a WTO exit, then I think they will offer that vote to parliament – and at that point our MPs and Lords will race to revoke the Article 50 letter, as they can then claim it is their only choice.

And remember those ministers and MPs don't have to believe a word of those scare stories themselves, they just have to believe that you do.

The Leave campaign must be ready in the New Year to dismantle every WTO horror story Remain comes up with and continue talking about the political and economic costs of the EU.

It is also vital that as many Leavers as possible sign the petition to Leave the EU without a deal in March 2019, which now has over a quarter of a million signatures and growing. I've left a link to it in the descriptions box below.

And also throw in that, were we not members at the moment, looking at the state of the EU right now with calls for more powers for Eurocrats and problems all across the continent, would you really want to join and be a part of that today?

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

Thank you for watching.


Comment Here!