European Union, Wohl, Britain discussed on FT Politics

FT Politics


As you get away with in those two positions, you have room full maneuver the nets, be absolutely clear about this like everything else in this negotiation that issue to will be. Settled Otago's set out by the European Union, not by the Risher Scott. Going back to your point about people's vote. You say public opinion is moving in this direction. I'm not sure would agree that I take his gradually move, but the fundamental still people just about support leaving the even most people want the government to get on with it. But the second issue with the people's vote in the Utah John is that you do this dangerous sensually saying to people, you didn't know what you will vote in full. You don't understand how complex this is. You need to think outside the public themselves saying, go to every single. Look to the glass window every fake group, and you'll hit every single best side. I never announced it will be such a mess. I never realized it would be so complicated. I never thought that it take so long, and I never thought most importantly, Wohl the told intents and purposes we would be leaving European Union, but not actually checking out of the European Union. And this is the knob of issues of as in my view. And I think he goes to the heart of what MRs may is due. She will hide all this ambiguity. As I said by making withdrawal agreement which is clear expensive and binding, but then putting the future trade relationship into a vague political statement that will be agreed by the British government in the EU the Truman publications of which will only become clear after March two thousand nine. Nineteen in. She has really well that there's a chasm between what was bro. His two mortars being delivered credibility gap that I described to you betrayed what people expected, which is to take back control, but innovate to find ourselves in some sort of spach call to arrangement Aula checkers in which we all half in and half out of the economic structures of the European Union governed by their rules in the crater Vala industrial manufactured in the agricultural goods. But without a say in how their rules are drawn up now, that is absolutely what people were promised. The time of the referendum we would as I say, taking out of the European Union but told intention purposes not leaving. Now this is a huge promise gap opening up around MRs May's Brexit strategy. I think the public is welcome to it by the way has been wives. Never. Good landslide for your Pacific people giving her the benefit of the down in effect, the public of two down to Brixton annot saying they're resigned to a dead believe they are, but they sent me to down a bit because they got other things going on in their lives. But when they see what is being proposed, I think many people will question whether this really is a fitting under appropriate stages for a country, light Britain, and final question Bank before move onto something. How are you going to make this happens? You've laid out the audience, you put in front of the British people, but what's the mechanism of getting that people's vote? You've got a pumped has come from parliament and I believe the parliament against Stanford is this pretty blindfold cross the fake liberalization and say, trust us, we had to leave the European. We know Ruffy what's going to happen afterwards, but we read it in his face because we did think you'll like it. And that's again, remain as and Brexit's will agree on that. And I think they will come together in Palmer, vote down Mrs Maes ticks now, how does that by coming in parliament may just wish to bury it head in the ground like Australia's and bokram better life it sometime in the future. But identity bats, where politics is in Britain. I think that's where parliament will be..

Coming up next