Bill Cash and The European Foundation are delighted as British people voted to leave the EU.
Bill Cash said, "I am extremely delighted and I congratulate all of my constituents on voting because it was one of the biggest turnouts in the country.
"This will hand some self-governance to the British people which people fought and died for and now we should be carrying the process of re-negotiation.
"David Cameron resigning is inevitable given the defeat he suffered in the vote and we will now be choosing a new prime minister in a few months."
"This is what people fought and died for in world wars. It is about freedom and democracy and the right to govern ourselves."
"The first thing we need to do is repeal the European Communities Act in parliament.
"We have now got to enter into negotiations with other member states. We are currently trading in the EU at a loss. It is that simple.
"I think we have got to look to an extremely positive future."
Although it was intended by European and American leaders that the creation of the European economic and political post-war settlement would contain Germany, the containment did not ever happen. My new book, From Brussels with Love, which I have co-authored, demonstrates precisely how since the end of World War Two, Britain’s leaders except for Margaret Thatcher have consistently acquiesced in, even appeased our German partner’s quest for European integration. In so doing, Britain has locked herself into the second tier of a two-tier EU, effectively dominated by Germany. ...continue reading
According to The Daily Telegraph “Between 30 and 50 Tory rebels are considering supporting an amendment tabled by Sir Bill Cash demanding an increase in the amount the Leave campaign can spend ahead of the referendum.” The Mirror also reports “Eurosceptic backbencher Sir Bill Cash has tabled an amendment to the Finance Bill designed to wreck the entire budget amid ongoing fury at the 23million leaflets being posted out by the Government this week.”
Margarida Vasconcelos @CivitasEUFacts: The government claims that the new settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union agreed by David Cameron and the other EU leaders at February’s European Council is an international law decision that is both legally binding and irreversible. First of all, it is important to stress that David Cameron has just sought some minor changes in four areas, economic governance, competitiveness, sovereignty and free movement, failing, therefore, to deliver the fundamental change that has been promised to the British people. Read the article here.
if he will provide an estimate of (a) the total level of immigration from other EU member states and (b) the annual number of people coming to settle in the UK from other EU member states which would trigger the activation of the proposed alert and safeguard emergency brake mechanism; and what discussions he has had with his counterparts in other EU member states and the European Commission on the appropriate thresholds for the emergency brake mechanism to be activated.
Priti Patel Minister of State (Department for Work and Pensions): The Department for Work and Pensions has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.
The House of Commons held a debate yesterday on Section 5 of the European Communities (Amendment) Act 1993. During the debate Bill Cash made the following speech and interventions: ...continue reading
The Government's White Paper, “The best of both worlds”, claims that the new Settlement for the United Kingdom within the European Union agreed by David Cameron and the other EU leaders at the February's European Council gives the UK a special status in a reformed EU. However, it would only have a limited impact on the European construction, and it hardly changes the status quo. The changes secured by David Cameron have not reformed the EU, as it has been claimed, and they do not “constitute an appropriate response” to the issues raised by British people. The new settlement main aim was to provide a solution for David Cameron's reform demands rather than address the British people concerns, while keeping the so called EU’s unity, on the base of compromise solutions, and without jeopardising the EU's fundamental values such as the freedom of movement and the development of the Economic and Monetary Union. As the real problem lies in the existing treaties, the British people needed a profound change, dealing with the treaties fundamental structure and foundations. However, David Cameron has failed to deliver the fundamental change that has been promised to the British people. In fact, David Cameron has not sought a fundamental change but just some changes in four areas, economic governance, competitiveness, sovereignty and welfare and free movement. Hence, British voters, in the forthcoming referendum, must be aware that the new settlement does not entail a fundamental change on the UK membership with the EU. ...continue reading
Boris Johnson has published today an important article in The Daily Telegraph, "Americans would never accept EU restrictions – so why should we?". Bill Cash's paper, "United States Policy on European Integration – the need for a re-evaluation", from 2012, should also be read. Please read the paper here: United States Policy.
Sir William Cash (Stone) (Con): The Government have just presented three White Papers to Parliament under their self-imposed legal duty to provide information under the European Union Referendum Act 2015. The Minister for Europe, during proceedings between the two Houses, gave me an undertaking that the Government information under that Act would certainly, as he put it, be accurate and impartial. The three recent White Papers are not. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister is the enforcer of the ministerial code, which demands that Ministers give accurate information to Parliament. Will he issue instructions to Foreign Office Ministers to review and correct those White Papers?
The Prime Minister: First, let me say to my hon. Friend that we believe in the sovereignty of Parliament. Parliament dictated that those documents would be published, and that is why they are being published. On the question of their content, their content has been prepared by civil servants under all the appropriate codes. If he does not agree with some of the content, I would say to him and to other colleagues: challenge the content. Have an argument about the content. Stop arguing about the process.
Absurd claims from politicised generals are thankfully rather rare in Britain, but on 24 February a number of retired commanders blotted their copy books by claiming Britain’s security was threatened by EU withdrawal. ...continue reading