We have no faith in Mrs. May, the current Prime Minister, leading this Country out of the EU. Mrs May has appointed pro EU Civil Servants to 'run the show' rather than the democratically elected MPs. Even with amendments to her White Paper, we believe she is incapable of finalising any negotiations, and by combining a Trade Agreement with Leaving is muddying the waters and is keeping us tied to the EU. Any trade agreement should be kept separate to leaving the EU. The majority of the Electorate voted to Leave in the EU Referendum. We therefore call upon the 1922 Committee to use their influence to put names forward to select a new leader, a MP who campaigned to Leave in the EU Referendum. We do NOT want a General Election but the process of a new leader similar to that which Mrs. May took over from Mr. David Cameron.

PETITION

In June, 2016, 17.4 million voted to Leave the political construct that is the EU. The Electorate were well aware of their actions and that by voting Leave, it meant leaving the EU in its entirety and reclaiming all Sovereignty and Powers back to the U.K.

Any Trade Agreement is a separate element and should be dealt with outside the vote to Leave.

Leaving the EU and a Trade Agreement are 2 separate issues and by combining the two, Mrs. May is muddying the waters. It is therefore obligatory in Article 50 that these two elements are kept separated. We leave on 29th March, 2019, fully leave the EU, in its entirety, regardless of a Trade Agreement – leaving the EU in its entirety, should not infringe on any Trade Deal. Any trade arrangement should be negotiated similar to that of any other country. There may be rules attached but not at the expense of our Sovereignty and Powers.

Article 50 (2) imposes an obligation on the EU to negotiate and conclude an agreement with the UK (the withdrawing state) setting out the arrangement for its withdrawal taking account of the framework for its future relationships with the EU. Thus the obligation was on the EU to set out its proposals and not the other way around. In fact, it is good commercial negotiating practice, to let the other side go first!

Any withdrawal Agreement, which leaves the UK in the Single Market, Customs Union and the ECJ and EU treaties, after the set date, is contrary to and inconsistent with, the decision arrived at by the Referendum decision. In that event, the actions of the Government will be unconstitutional and undemocratic and likely to lead to considerable public unrest.

The UK does not require a maintained border with Ireland. If a maintained border is a condition of the EU, then it is up to the EU to install such and maintain at their cost.

At no time on the ballot paper, were the words written ‘to include a transitional period’ mentioned.

We have no faith in Mrs. May leading this Country out of the EU. Even with amendments to her White Paper, we believe she is incapable of finalising any negotiations and would not be able to continue with the EU, which in any event, will be rejected by them.

In her ‘White Paper’, the Prime Minister shows that she has no intention of carrying through with the wishes of the Electorate by leaving the EU in its entirety, but is in fact, cherry picking parts so that the U.K. can remain in the EU.

The government’s failure to adequately show that they have prepared for a “no deal” has, without doubt, weakened her hand. It is therefore imperative that a change of Leadership is made now and we can then move forward with a full Brexit. The EU Referendum was final and the vote was taken. We therefore dispute that there is any need for a Second Referendum and in any event, in doing so would undermine the democratic result in 2016.

Furthermore, previous actions by Ministers and MPs and previous PMs, whereby the Sovereignty of the U.K. was transferred to a foreign entity without the Consent of the Electorate was ultra vires and unconstitutional. It is not within the powers of MPs to give away Sovereignty without a Referendum by the Electorate. Unless this is corrected under Article 50, those individuals should be held to account, in a court of law, or by the process of impeachment instigated by Referendum of the Electorate.

According to the White Paper, it would appear that many aspects will remain ‘aligned’, and under the control of the EU. The security of the Country should be one, if not the, important consideration of any Leader of the U.K. It is imperative therefore that our Armed Forces continue their allegiance to Queen and Country and not the EU. Our Armed Forces are adversely affected by the EU arrangements. Mrs. May wishes to continue, to have our Defence and Security bound by the EU. This not only cannot continue but is unconstitutional and again undermines the democratic vote taken by the Electorate in the 2016 EU Referendum. It is counterproductive for the UK to stay in the new European Defence Fund and EU defence industrial programme because these facilities require UK adherence to EU rules, policies and structures.

We would therefore ask all Conservative MPs to vote for a motion of no confidence in the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister had in fact campaigned to Remain in the EU and therefore does not have the right understanding, nor mind set to carry this through correctly. She should be replaced with an MP who campaigned to Leave the EU; therefore allowing that person to carry out their duties in line with the wishes of the majority of the Electorate. We do NOT wish for a General Election but instead a new Conservative Leader, in the manner in which Mrs. May took over from Mr. D. Cameron. This DOES NOT have to involve a General Election, unless MPs are so unwise as to obstruct the process of leaving, and we call upon the 1922 Committee to use its influence to put names forward in order that a new leader may be selected. Failing to do this, would no doubt result in the destruction of the Conservative Party forever!

However, there is an elephant in the room.

The Electorate, at every General Election, vote for their MP from a political party to represent them in Parliament. However, too much authority and decision making is given to Civil Servants – they are not Masters, the clue is in their name! In this particular case, Mrs. May has delegated most of the negotiations and decisions to a Civil Servant, her ‘top EU Advisor’, Olly Robbins, at the same time by passing the remit given to David Davis, Brexit Secretary. It is well known that Mr. Robbins is very pro EU and in fact, some might say, an EU fanatic. It is obvious that Mr. Robbins is ‘running the show’ together with a like-minded team of Civil Servants; this has been well documented in many papers and on line media as emphasised by recent resignations of Government Ministers.

We demand that all Civil Servants are removed from any negotiation in respect of Brexit and replaced with Civil Servants that are able to take their instructions from democratically elected MPs who voted Leave. If this is not possible, perhaps the Government should consider outsourcing the project so that it may be delivered correctly and effectively.

To summarise :