The Curse of Duff strikes again!

Last week I wrote to my local Euro MP - and yes, you're right, my social life isn't up to much these days!  Her name is Mrs. Julie Girling and it was reported that she had voted against her party, and in my opinion, against her country, by supporting the EU in its intention to stop further Brexit negotiations until we give in to their demands.  This was my e-mail which at least has the virtue of brevity:

I read that you voted against Britain in the European debate which decided NOT to  allow the negotiations to move on to the next phase.
Ah well, that's one conservative vote you will definitely NOT receive at the next election from Milborne Port in Somerset.

Her response was, shall we say, political, or waffling, you choose:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent vote on the non-binding resolution on the progress of the Brexit Negotiations. The headlines that you have seen do not reflect the whole resolution, much of the media coverage has reduced the vote to a zero-sum game - not something I recognise. I did not vote to prevent trade talks, in fact in my speech I clearly call on the Council to open up parallel negotiations on trade. I did however vote to acknowledge that not enough progress has been made between the two parties. An opinion which is shared by many on both sides of the Brexit debate.
 
The caricature of two embittered enemies - the UK and the EU - is as facile as it is unsustainable. For the future prosperity and peace of the continent good relations must be preserved, and I feel the European Parliament is uniquely placed to help facilitate this. Many conservatives, myself included, wish to follow the Prime Ministers Florence call for action and assist in moving the negotiations forward. It is patently obvious that the negotiations have not made sufficient progress and I sought to make that clear in my vote.
 
The European Parliament is particularly experienced in negotiation, consensus and compromise. What is more, the overwhelming majority of MEPs have a very calm and rational view of Brexit, recognising the need for cooperation and not hostility.  I sincerely hope that the vote focuses the minds of negotiators, and that the European Parliament will be in a position to help drive more effective negotiations. This is how I will continue to represent the South-West, and this is the only way I can foresee a collegiate conclusion.      
 
I want to stress that while I have always respected the democratic position of the British people, I have never agreed to silently acquiesce as our country heads towards a cliff edge, with no deal and a complete withdrawal - what Kenneth Clarke accurately called a calamitous act of national self-harm. The constituents of the South-West elected me to represent their best interests, not to preside over wanton economic self-harm.
 
I know many constituents do not agree with me but we still live in a democracy with the right to free speech. I cannot change my mind on an issue of such magnitude based on a party whip. I have always put my constituents and country first and will continue to do so. This does not make me undemocratic, indeed I believe I am doing my duty in protecting the interests of the 48%.

My reply was brief and to the point:

"I did however vote to acknowledge that not enough progress has been made between the two parties."

With respect, no, you voted to support the EU in NOT allowing negotiations to proceed any further until Britain made concessions.

"The European Parliament is particularly experienced in negotiation, consensus and compromise."

Try telling that to the Greeks!

"I want to stress that while I have always respected the democratic position of the British people".

Er, except when a democratic majority in a free vote decides not to follow your advice!

"I know many constituents do not agree with me but we still live in a democracy with the right to free speech"

So it's a good job you don't live in Catalonia as the EU 'apparat' remains silent when the Spanish government unleash police violence on their people.

Today, courtesy of Guido, I am delighted to report that the Conservative whip has been removed from her.  Now, if only we could remove her fat salary and perks and pension, as well! 

 

Comments

[Loz]

By George and all the Saints! The Gaffer engaging with a Euro MP!

They've got you now. Sucking you into the vortex of federalism. It's like that moment we discover that instead of "never talking to terrorists" the state has decided to talk to terrorists. Long slow road to seeing the queen shaking hands with Martin McGuinness.

And there's another funny thing: Why would you object to an MEP voting to prevent progress on the talks? Preventing progress on the talks is the surest way to ensure a full and hard Brexit. If you can get the clock to tick past midnight March 31st 2019 and still be discussing the leaving bill, EU immigrants, and Irish border, it's job done. You've taken back control, because every decision - including those 3 - will be Blighty's. That MEP and the 19 others have done you a favour.

Or don't tell me you've softened your Brexit stance!

Wassup, the prospect of being 100% owned and operated by HMG and Blighty's home grown pols not all it was cracked up to be?

SoD

[Whitewall]

I like a lot of the comments in that Guido link.

[Bob]

Catch 22. No trade deals no process negotiations. No process negotiations no trade deals. In the book, just because pilots couldn't get psychological discharges didn't mean they couldn't crash land.

[David Duff]

That tedious little Canuck 'scrote' tries again. How much ego do you need to insist on pushing in where nobody wants you?

[Whitewall]

David, maybe the Canuck wants a position at D&N Court?

How about "Groom of the Stool"