MP says no EU deal better than a bad deal
John Baron MP was in the House of Commons for the debate over the Lords’ amendments yesterday evening, and made some brief contributions during the short time allotted to discuss the issues raised by Peers. He also voted against both amendments, supporting the Prime Minister in her bid to trigger Article 50 by the end of March.
“The view of some MPs during the debate that the electorate did not understand the consequences of leaving or the debate itself, and therefore Parliament needed a vote to explore ‘other options’ if there was no deal, sounds condescending. There was a full and frank debate over the referendum campaign. The electorate was fully aware of ‘Project Fear’s’ erroneous warnings, and that we may leave with or without a deal, and yet still voted to leave.”
“Which part of the referendum result do the ‘remoaners’ not understand? Parliament made a contract with the electorate to honour the result, and this is what we are now doing.”
“Moreover, some also stated their view that leaving the EU with a bad deal is better than with no deal. This is ludicrous – the World Trade Organisation’s ‘most favoured nation’ rules mean we would trade with the EU on the same basis as most other countries. The EU’s biggest trading partners, such as the US, China and India, exclusively use WTO terms to trade profitably and easily with the EU. There is no reason why Britain, as one of the world’s largest economies, should be any different.”