based on UK and EU official sources

Brexit news
Facts4EU Brexit Index
Brexit Battle Pack
Fight for Brexit
Click to donate or buy commemorative items


Facts4EU testimonials
Facts4EU testimonials
| Your
| Help
| Contact
Quick Brexit facts from reliable, official sources
Read by Ministers, MPs, MEPs, journalists, campaigners, and the public
BREXIT NEWS 01-14 MARCH 2018  
Yesterday in Strasbourg...                                        © EU Parliament TV
Debate: ‘Guidelines on the framework of future EU-UK relations’
It costs hundreds of millions to transfer the EU Parliament, its staff, and all its documents to Strasbourg for 4 days, 12 times a year. Below we summarise some of what they did yesterday so that you can decide if this is a good use of the UK’s hard-earned tax pounds.
The EU Parliament spent hours giving speeches to itself yesterday during what passes for a ‘debate’ in EU circles, regarding the future of the EU’s relations with the UK.
In addition to the MEPs, the chamber also saw the presence of unelected EU Commission President Juncker, unelected Chief Brexit Negotiator Michel Barnier, and the new unelected Secretary-General of the EU Commission: the German Martin Selmayr.
The debate was based on the document which we reviewed a week ago under the heading “Read this and walk”.
Below we have assembled links to the main speeches of interest so that you can listen to what was said. Regrettably the EU Parliament is not as efficient as the Houses of Parliament, where Hansard transcripts are available within hours. We therefore don’t have any of these speeches in written form. If you haven’t really listened to the EU Parliament at work before, the list below is not a bad example of them in all their glory.
We have created links to the English versions of the speeches. Please note that the European Parliament's TV system isn't always the easiest. It is possible the videos might take some moments to load, and that you might have to press 'play' more than once. That was certainly the case at 4.00am when we were assembling this.
These speeches are by the leaders (or designated speakers) of the Parliament’s main eight political groupings. You will note that two of these – the last to be called – are British.
Nigel Farage listening patiently yesterday              © EU Parliament TV
Nigel Farage is familiar to everyone. Janice Atkinson almost never receives any coverage on the BBC, Sky or ITN but is one of the Vice-Presidents of the Europe of Nations and Freedom (ENF) group.
In broad terms, it is possible to summarise the speeches from the EU27 side as having the usual hostile, anti-British content. And as is becoming usual, this is dressed up in language to convey the impression to EU27 citizens that the EU is being supremely reasonable with the UK.
For example, Michel Barnier has obviously been told to tone things down, because his speech yesterday continually referred to what a great country the UK is. Before anyone thought he had been at Herr Juncker's cognac, however, he then re-stated that the UK must debase itself completely before the might of the EU ‘acquis’ - its body of law and procedures. All supremely reasonable…
The majority of content in the speeches was pure waffle as usual. Belgian waffles in the case of Guy Verhopeless of the ALDE group and Philippe Lamberts of the Greens group.
Overall no-one had anything new to say, but that didn’t stop the prima donnas of the EU preening and posturing for hours at your expense.
All you really need to know from yesterday is that all these folk are 100% agreed that the UK must be punished for Brexit (but no-one must use that term) and that any Transition Period will involve absolutely all commitments and liabilities of EU membership, but with no rights whatsoever.
Transition will be EU minus minus minus any benefits.
This last point is essential to understand. It really doesn’t matter what Mrs May or any of her ministers say. The reality is what the UK government has played an appalling hand and has shown itself to be weak at every stage. As a result the EU keeps playing an ever harder hardball. Any idea of a sensible compromise from the EU on anything is so remote as to be completely implausible.
Theresa May and her colleagues can use whatever fudged form of words they want. In the end an agreement has to be put into writing. Already the so-called ‘Phase 1’ agreement which Theresa May triumphantly paraded before Christmas isn’t worth the paper it isn’t yet written on. That took 8 months to agree… and it’s quite obviously not even agreed.
Mrs May has rejected the EU’s document and the EU has rejected her rejection.
We have consistently argued from the beginning that no sensible deal would be done with the EU because for them this is idealogical and political. The EU elites would rather see their own people suffer massive job losses and a loss of the UK’s security and defence umbrella, than negotiate a rational agreement based on sound logic and economic interest.
A couple of years ago we advocated very strongly that all schools in the UK should be made to show videos of speeches by Jean-Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk, and others. In particular, regular readers will remember that we proposed that Juncker’s ‘State of the Union’ speeches should be compulsory viewing in schools, and that universities should also show these in lecture halls for those students who wished to attend.
We would now go one step further.
We believe that the entire House of Commons and House of Lords should be made to sit through one entire day of speeches from the EU elites – especially the unelected ones such as Juncker, Tusk, Mogherini, Barnier, and any Commissioners. The cabinet should be made to sit through two days, and the senior echelons of the Civil Service should sit through five days of EU speeches.
In other words, the closer to the coalface of decision-making and negotiating they are in government, the more they have to experience the mindset of the opposing side.
If that happened, we believe it’s inevitable that the government’s whole Brexit strategy would start to change in subtle ways.
We know the EU mindset because we study it. It is as plain as day to us that ministers and civil servants don’t. And that matters because they will never get the best outcome if they don’t understand something as important as this.
[ Sources: EU Parliament ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        06.15am, 14 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: CliveB, UK      Date/Time: 14 Mar 2018, 09.36am
Message: Do the EU parliament vote after such debates? How often has it voted against a bill? ie does it have any real power to alter bills? I believe it cannot introduce nor retire legislation.
Reply: Hi Clive. It votes on things most days it's in session, sometimes not. When there are votes they almost always vote FOR, in our experience, because these things are 'carved up' well before any debate takes place. The EU Parliament cannot introduce nor retire legislation, you are absolutely correct. Those things are the prerogative of the unelected EU Commission. This debate was to agree something to send to the EU Council before its summit on Brexit next week. Kind of a 'this is what we think' motion. This is an 'in broad terms' reply, because anything to do with EU internal processes is complicated!
Please note that the EU Parliament's vote on any eventual Brexit deal does carry veto rights, so it matters what these people think.
To be honest there are no cute puppies, abandoned children
or even a snow leopard on the Facts4EU team...
...But we do work very hard.
   Do you think you can still help us   
to keep up the good work?
One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
This list is being updated.
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team
© EU Parliament
Click here at 9am to watch EU Commission Chief Brexit Negotiator Michel Barnier addressing the EU Parliament, ahead of the EU Council summit on 22-23 March.
This has been a public service from the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team, as the BBC rarely shows this man's speeches in full.
[ Sources: EU Parliament ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        08.55am, 13 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
© Welt am Sonntag
Germany is in the process of forming its new government, almost 6 months after the general elections there. The new Minister for the Interior has wasted no time in making waves.
  • Germany’s new ‘Amber Rudd’ will be Herr Horst Seehofer
  • Seehofer is from the right-wing Bavarian sister party of Angela Merkel’s CDU
  • He has just announced a ‘zero tolerance’ policy towards illegal migrants
  • And he isn’t even in office yet
  • UK political establishment is still blind to the radical moves to the right in the EU
It has barely been mentioned on the BBC news, but Germany has been without an effective permanent government for almost 6 months. No doubt if that had happened in the UK after the British general election last year it would all have been blamed on Brexit and would have been on our screens daily.
As it is, Germany has played a more minor role than normal in all EU governance in the last six months. This has been apparent on a day-to-day basis, to say nothing of the lack of regular and strong pronouncements from Angela Merkel about Brexit. Effectively for the last half-a-year, Angela Merkel has been merely a caretaker Chancellor of Germany.
Angela Merkel remains Chancellor and in order for her to govern, the Grand Coalition - or ‘GroKo’ - is back. This means a coalition between the CDU/CSU combined centre-right party of Frau Merkel, and the severely depleted socialist SPD.
In fact, the socialists from the SPD are now so much weaker that their real influence on policy appears to be abating already. They scored 20% in the election and a recent poll had their support slipping to just 16%.
Horst Seehofer, the right-wing leader of the Christian Social Union (CSU), Frau Merkel’s sister party, will this week become the German Interior Minister. This position is the equivalent in the UK of the Home Secretary, a role currently held by arch-remainer Amber Rudd.
Under plans unveiled in recent days, this German ministry will soon be renamed as the Ministry of the Interior, Construction and Homeland. The word for homeland in German is ‘Heimat’ and this is fraught with connotations which trouble many and which date back to the era of the Third Reich.
‘Heimat’ invokes a sentimental longing for a homeland but more than that the word also implies what respected German newspaper Handelsblatt refers to as “a sense of home among a kindred tribe”. It went on to describe how the Nazis “elevated Heimat to a national concept”.
Putting that to one side and bringing things solidly up-to-date, we looked at an interview conducted by German newspaper Bild Am Sonntag with the new German Home Secretary on Sunday. Much of the interview revolved around Germany’s migrant problem.
  • “Master plan for faster asylum procedures, and more consistent deportations”
  • “The number of deportations must be increased significantly”
  • “We need to take tougher action, especially in the case of criminals and perpetrators among asylum seekers”
  • “Zero tolerance” policy toward migrants who commit criminal acts
  • “When it comes to protecting our citizens, we need a strong state - I'll make sure of that”
Herr Seehofer was speaking for a German readership, or perhaps he might not have used the term “master plan”.
Germany’s new Interior Minister also called for much better CCTV at every “hot spot” in the country.
“There has to be a consensus throughout Germany that we will no longer tolerate lawless zones,” he said.
If Germany’s new Home Secretary talks about “hot spots” and “lawless zones”, we know what he’s talking about. Frankly so does everyone else, even if they don’t want to admit it. The term he should have used for clarity was “no-go zones”.
The topic of ‘No-Go’ zones has been highly contentious ever since President Donald Trump started tweeting about it. Up until then, the mainstream media in the UK and in the EU27 had refused to accept that no-go zones existed in their countries.
Then President Trump tweeted, with comments about no-go zones in London and all the problems that exist in Sweden. This outraged the liberal commentariat of western Europe, most of whom denied the existence of a problem despite the mounting evidence each week.
The simple facts are that police officers across the EU privately accept that no-go zones exist in majority migrant areas of EU cities. These are areas where police, fire-fighting and ambulance services will not go, unless the operation is protected by a strong, combined force, planned in advance.
On Sunday, the new Interior Minister of the largest country in the EU effectively admitted the existence of the no-go zones which we and others have reported for years. He also openly discussed plans for much tougher policies on migrants.
Herr Seehofer has been talking openly about the migrant crisis for many years. Previously his rhetoric was hardly in keeping with that of ‘Mutti’ – Chancellor Merkel. Now he is about to enter government in a very senior role. Judging by his interview in Sunday’s Bild Am Sonntag, it looks increasingly likely that Germany will start adopting many of the migrant policies that have been adopted by eastern European member states, and which were first advocated by Hungary.
The EU Commission seems determined to pursue certain EU member states for what it sees as transgressions in not wanting to allow in illegal migrants. Unfortunately for the unelected Commission, they don’t seem able to realise that their bizarre view of the world is just that, and is fast becoming obsolete.
They are stuck in some liberal-luvvie world of ‘no borders’, when in fact the hard realities of life are even now being accepted by the Germans, who some would say invited in the problem in the first place.
The tone has changed across the EU. It changed some time ago, but the British establishment, media, & luvvies haven’t cottoned on yet.
Part of the problem is that the vast majority of them know nothing about the EU. This is obvious when they talk about their utopian idea of what it is. They haven’t spent much time there, don’t speak any languages fluently, and don’t monitor what goes on day-to-day in Brussels and in the major EU capitals as we do.
As a consequence perhaps it’s not surprising that they don’t yet realise that the policies now being espoused across the EU have changed. Can you imagine the reaction if a mainstream politician in the UK started talking about a master plan for faster asylum procedures and deportations being increased and speeded up? Or a zero tolerance policy towards some migrants?
In the last few days the British government has started detaining young conservative foreign journalists and commentators and has prevented them from entering the UK. We consider this to be outrageous and will soon be writing about it.
For the moment we will simply remark that there are many government ministers from EU countries who could be banned by the British government on the same basis of ‘stirring up racial hatred’.
The EU has been changing significantly since Brexit and the UK establishment and media needs to start waking up to the fact.
[ Sources: Bild Am Sonntag ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        06.20am, 13 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
© LibDems
Many readers will be aware that the leader of the LibDems, Vince Cable, gave a controversial speech at the weekend to the Spring Conference of his party. This speech caused significant comment. We therefore thought you might like to read what he had to say.
“I have myself been on a journey. I confess that my own initial reaction to the referendum was to think there was little choice but to pursue Brexit: I thought ‘the public have voted to be poorer. That is their right.’
What changed my mind was the evidence that Brexit had overwhelmingly been the choice of the older generation. 75% of under 25s voted to Remain. But 70% of over 65s voted for Brexit.
Too many were driven by a nostalgia for a world where passports were blue, faces were white, and the map was coloured imperial pink.
Their votes on one wet day in June, crushing the hopes and aspiration of the young for years to come.
The excuse for this outrage – a vision of a Global Britain signing lots of new trade deals – is a fraud. Far from opening our arms to the world, we will be tearing up preferential trade deals we already have with 27 countries in the EU and 74 outside it.
There is no more eloquent testimony to the government’s folly about trade, that at a time when the world is descending into Trade War, they put more faith in the Warmonger in Washington than they do in our friends and trade partners in Europe.
It was never a good idea to leave the EU. To leave it now borders on extreme recklessness. And only our Liberal Democrat team, led by Tom Brake, are making that argument in Parliament.
Old wounds that were slowly healing within the European family are being re-opened. Ireland. Gibraltar. I went to Dublin before Christmas to meet business and political leaders. They are afraid, very afraid, that the Good Friday Agreement and the close economic links with Britain will be trashed to accommodate Brexit hard liners.
The Gibraltarian Government is afraid that their people – our people, British citizens – will be sacrificial pawns in this needless rush for the EU exit door.
And while all these crucial questions are up in the air, we still don’t know which faction of the Conservative Party will win. There are two totally different views of Brexit on offer. One is to stay as close as possible to the rules of the Single Market and Customs Union to minimise the damage. To be like Norway with a customs union attached. So called ‘soft Brexit’.
This is plainly more sensible economically than the alternative, but it raises the obvious question: why on earth bother to leave?
The other is to diverge as much as possible, causing maximum disruption to manufacturing industry, financial services and creative industries, all in the name of ‘sovereignty’.
What we are left with is incoherence. The doctrine of diverging convergence or converging divergence. The one certain consequence is that with a divided, confused team of 1 facing a united, determined team of 27, the European negotiators will dictate the terms. This will, in turn, create the sense of victimhood Brexiteers crave: being under the European yoke.
I would go so far as to say Britain is now mired in a protracted, non-violent civil war. Allied to the poisonous rhetoric about ‘traitors’ and ‘saboteurs’, and what Theresa May calls ‘citizens of nowhere’... we have a toxic brew which fuels the populist right.
What a disgrace that the fools’ errand of Brexit… embarked on to paper over cracks in the Conservative Party has resulted in hate crime on our streets.
Our message is clear: Liberal Democrats will rebuild an open, tolerant, outward-looking Britain. We want our country back.
And amid all this where is the Leader of Her Majesty’s Official and Loyal Opposition? What does HE want? These early days of 2018 have seen Labour has make a few tentative gestures in the direction of sanity. But very few. And very tentative.
To be a member of a customs union. Not the customs union. And still strongly committed to working with Theresa May to make Brexit happen.
Make no mistake about it, Conference: Jeremy Corbyn is letting down the very people he claims to defend… because: You cannot speak up for the poor and be complicit in making the country poorer. You cannot claim to love the NHS knowing that Brexit will starve it of cash. You cannot be an advocate of strong rights at work, and stand by while your country walks away from the organisation which has most stood up for workers.
The Labour Party has imported into politics the principles of quantum physics where an object can be there and not there, at the same time. They believe you can be for Brexit it and against it. But politics is not physics.
Jeremy – The time has come to decide. There is no ‘jobs first’ Brexit. But there is a new way to inspire those young supporters you won last year, and to make a real difference.
Join our campaign. Together we can win an Exit from Brexit.”
It is beneath us to comment on this individual's slurs and inaccuracies.
Instead we will point out to you that:
2,371,910 British people
voted for this Remoaner’s party at the general election last June.
We still have a massive job to do, countering the incessant pro-EU anti-Brexit propaganda like Cable’s, which hits the British people on a daily basis.
We’re grateful for any help you can give us to keep going.
[ Sources: The LibDems ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        06.20am, 13 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 13 Mar 2018, 12.22pm
Message: I remember when we had a blue passport, white faces and pink areas on the atlas. The UK gave Independence to all the colonies in Africa and look at them now. Democratic countries one man one vote once, run by succession of despots who stole billions of pounds of aid and stashed it in Swiss bank accounts, who trashed the countries, and whose leaders now complain about British colonialism. I also remember being told the EEC/EU was a trading block, and look how that turned out. The saintly Vince Cable can mock all he likes, but when we leave the EU and become a sovereign country again we will still be allowed to travel, study and work in other EU countries, we did before joining. The difference being we will have to apply for a work visa. If you work in USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand you have to apply for a work visa, so what. You only get a visa for those countries if you have a skill that THEY want. The same will apply here in the UK. As for the blue passport, I keep mine in a blue leather passport cover. It's a travel document, who cares what colour.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
In continuing Brexit defiance of the dire predictions
of the Project Doomers of the Remain campaign in the EU Referendum,
the latest export figures show healthy growth in last 12 months
On Friday the Office for National Statistics released the latest figures for overseas trade. Below we present a snapshot followed by some important background.
  • Export of services up by 10.1%
  • Export of goods up by 12.6%
  • Total exports (up 11.5%) increased faster than imports (up 8.6%)
  • Trade deficit narrowed by £12.8bn over the year
[These are from ONS figures released 09 March 2018, for the year to Jan 2018, compared to the year to Jan 2017.]
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The export figures above reflect a buoyant economy. But let’s look back to what the British people were threatened with, if they voted to leave the EU.
We have not found any specific threats about what would happen to UK exports but there was plenty on what would happen to jobs and output, and exports are a function of these. The country was threatened that it would plunge into an immediate decline and recession if it voted to leave the EU.
Exactly one month before the EU referendum the DIY chain B&Q made its head office available to the Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne, to deliver their threats of a DIY recession if Britain voted to leave the EU.
Former Prime Minister & Chancellor threatening Brexit chaos                            © BBC (screengrab)
Messrs Cameron and Osborne were launching a new, lengthy Treasury document which predicted economic Armageddon if the UK voted to leave the EU. Presumably they chose the Head Office of B&Q as the venue for this major campaign speech in order to allow Cameron to use the term “a DIY recession”.
Specifically, George Osborne predicted “up to 820,000 jobs lost”. Publishing Treasury analysis, he said a Leave vote would cause:
“an immediate and profound” economic shock
IMPORTANT NOTE: This was not a prediction of what would happen when Britain finally left the EU. It was a prediction - one of many dire predictions they made on a variety of indicators - of what would happen immediately after the vote, if the British public voted to leave.
This was widely reported in all the media at the time, and the BBC took great pleasure in running a major video on the subject. We are not allowed to run BBC video clips on our site but below you can see the BBC’s Economics Editor Kamal Ahmad presenting a BBC graphic on this as part of the video.
BBC Economics Editor reports Govt's dire warnings, 23 May 2016                 © BBC (screengrab)
According to the latest figures released by the Office for National Statistics, Brexit Britain is performing considerably better than the then Chancellor and then Prime Minister threatened.
There were 32.15 million people in work, 321,000 more than for a year earlier.
The employment rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were in work) was 75.2%, higher than for a year earlier (74.6%) and amongst the highest since 1972.
There were 1.47 million unemployed people (people not in work but seeking and available to work), 123,000 fewer than for a year earlier.
The unemployment rate was 4.4%, down from 4.8% for a year earlier.
The inactivity rate (the proportion of people aged from 16 to 64 who were economically inactive) was 21.3%, lower than for a year earlier (21.6%) and still at the lowest since 1971.
[These are from the latest ONS figures released last month.]
Finally, here is some vintage Project Fear from the Chancellor, from his launch of the Treasury's wholly erroneous and completely discredited main Brexit document:
“With exactly one month to go to the referendum, the British people must ask themselves this question: can we knowingly vote for a recession? Does Britain really want this DIY recession? Because that’s what the evidence shows we’ll get if we vote to leave the EU.”
- George Osborne, Chancellor, 23 May 2016
Like you, we're forced to listen to Remoaner MPs on an almost daily basis. This happens because the moment one of them utters something - no matter how inane - the BBC and/or Sky News and/or ITN covers it.
Regrettably the same is not true of pro-Brexit MPs, who struggle to get asked on to the major networks. When they do, their words are then distorted by Remoaner MPs immediately afterwards.
One evening our editor received a call at home from a former cabinet minister. During the conversation, this senior and well-regarded politician mentioned the continuing attacks he receives from Remainers.
“What staggers me is the way they continually lie quite blatantly,” he said.
“Even when it’s been something I said in a recorded interview the same day, which they can listen to on the Internet, they quote me as saying something different. And if my office tries to point this out, they don’t care and keep repeating the lies.”
Of course most of the public will say that politicians lie, and regrettably history is full of examples. In fact some of us would go further and endorse a theme of a major US network show of the last decade, whose main character’s view of people was: “Everybody Lies”.
Unfortunately, however, the sheer magnitude of the lies from some Remainers is quite appalling.
Photo: Hugh Laurie as 'Dr House'
The further we get from the date of the Referendum, the more brazen are the lies from these Remoaner MPs. It is as if they think the British public has no memory of anything that occurred before the vote. Unfortunately the likes of Chuka Umunna, Anna Soubry and the others are almost never challenged with facts. When did you ever hear a TV presenter ask them "But 3 weeks before the vote you said..." or "But the latest figures show that the opposite is the case"?
The reason you almost never hear this (unless it's Andrew Neil doing the interview) is two-fold:
  1. They're generally clueless, and
  2. They're of the Remoaner persuasion, so they don't even want to go there.
For the benefit of our many overseas readers who have received a quite different impression from the grotesquely Europhile BBC over the last year or two, we regularly have to explain that the British public were lied to most by the Remain campaign, not by the Brexiteers.
Frankly the Brexit campaigns didn’t need to lie or exaggerate – the EU is quite bad enough without needing to overstate. The only exaggeration was a claim made on the side of a bus by a moron in the Vote Leave management team - a claim which we never supported from day one.
This, however, was very mild in comparison with the lies of the Remainers including the Prime Minister and his senior team. The figure on the bus was the gross figure for UK contributions, without stating that is was the gross and not the net figure. Nevertheless, it is true that Britons were (and still are) haemorrhaging their tax pounds to the EU on a weekly basis.
Of one thing there can be no doubt: over a year after the historic vote to leave the EU, the UK is on great form. A wide variety of indicators are positive and the good news just keeps on coming.
Yes, of course nothing's ever perfect and of course there are many things we would all like to see improve. That's always the case in any country, regardless of one-off events like Brexit. However it's impossible for any reasonable person not to admit that the portenders of doom and misery got everything hopelessly and unarguably wrong in 2016.
What's almost worse is that those Remoaners are sticking to their lies despite all the evidence to the contrary each day.
Brexit Britain is in good shape and should hold its head up very high when talking to the EU.
[ Sources: Office for National Statistics | The Treasury | BBC ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        06.55am, 12 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Thinker, Lancashire, UK      Date/Time: 12 Mar 2018, 2.10pm
Message: Why I didn't believe in Project Fear. Remember that Project Fear was predicated upon Leave being the wish of the majority of the population and winning the referendum. Obvious, I know but bear with me. In the beginning Project Fear was coming from the experts within their field and - whatever you might think about the people who espoused those fields - the experts were numerous, varied and influential. It seemed to me, however, that they were only one side of the equation. These people were on the 'supply' side of the equation. They were offering the money and services to the country and they were complaining about what would happen from the 'demand' side of the economic equation. If Project Fear was to happen then it would be because the people who consume that money and those services on the 'demand' side of the equation also bought into it and adjusted their finances accordingly. It thought that if Leave won then, by definition, the majority of people would be happy that we were leaving the EU. Why, if the majority of people were going to be happy, would Project Fear materialise at all? I could not see that the 'demand' for the economic circumstances of Project Fear would even exist from the majority of the population. Several people gave me possible reasons why they might but I could not accept their arguments. Firstly they pointed out that, even if Leave won that would not mean the majority of people had voted for it because there was always going to be a large proportion of people who would not vote at all. Perhaps these people would usher in Project Fear. I did not accept this argument because if those people did not vote then, in most cases, it would mean that they did not care enough one way or the other whether we left the EU or not. I could not see these people suddenly becoming panic stricken in large enough numbers to precipitate Project Fear because they had not cared enough to vote in the first place. I then realised that, if the numbers of those who hadn't voted were added to the winning Brexit vote, we would end up with a number that guaranteed either happiness or acceptance amongst the huge majority of the population. This would seem to make Project Fear less likely to take hold within the majority of the UK's population, not more likely. Secondly, some ten days or two weeks after the Referendum the MSM was full of headlines and stories about how old people had 'stolen' the future away from young people. Lots of graphs and statistics were doing the rounds that 'proved' that the majority of young people had wanted to Remain. Of course those graphs and statistics only showed that the majority of young people who actually bothered to vote wanted Remain; as usual, the majority of young people on the whole did not vote at all. They never do. This left me with two realisations. The first was that the majority of young people would be in the group of those who were accepting of Brexit because they hadn't cared enough to vote at all. The second was that young people of that demographic are among the poorest in society. A good number of them are on student loans, minimum wages and/or the bank of mum and dad. Given that they have relatively little economic clout it would seem unreasonable to expect them to have the resources to manifest Project Fear. The corollary to that is that those people who are happiest, most optimistic or at least not bothered by the result are the ones with the most financial influence from the 'demand' side of the economic equation. They would not be interested in manifesting Project Fear because they either voted to leave despite it or they have no preference one way or the other. I know I'm not an expert in any of the fields necessary to work out how hard or complex or costly Brexit will end up being but I couldn't see any arguments out there that answered those basic points. Why would Brexit result in Armageddon when the majority of the UK was either happy or accepting of Brexit - and they proved they were by producing the 'Leave' vote? My message to all those experts is: Get out there and make Brexit happen. That is why you are all in the positions of responsibility that you are. We here on the 'demand' side of the equation will continue to support you financially while you get on with it. We believe in our country. Only if you betray us will we cease supporting you and that would be because we would no longer trust you. If that goes then you are likely to see financial instability that would dwarf Project Fear. It's not a threat, it's simply what would happen as a result of knowing that any contract of trust we have with you is null and void.
Name: Chris, Devizes      Date/Time: 12 Mar 2018, 1.20pm
Message: Do we know if there are any common passages within the latest 'Impact assessment' report and the totally discredited pre-referendum report from Osborne? That is: Is it just a 'cut and paste' job? If there are, it would discredit the new report too.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 12 Mar 2018, 11.52am
Message: Excellent article again. Only hardcore Remainers and self-interest group will continue with the lies, but the general public is now fully aware how desperate the Remainers have become, and I would suggest, are now realising how the likes of Cameron and Osborne et al are in the pockets of big business. It just remains to see how the outcome in March 2019 pans out. The jury is still out on T. May and for sure Hammond cannot be trusted. Thank you for this positive news and again for illustrating how ridiculous the nefarious Remoaners in Government continue to be.
Following yesterday’s Facts4EU.Org article containing our unique and original research into the EU’s effect on the UK’s fishing industry, some more key players have had conversations with us.
We have also obtained a copy of a private report on the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy which was provided to Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg last week, in his capacity as Chairman of the Conservative MP’s European Research Group (ERG).
This was given to us in order to bring you a greater understanding of the seriousness of the situation.
“Failure to exempt fisheries from the Transition Period will sign the death warrant for what’s left of the British industry.”
Opening to the report to ERG, 06 March 2018
Many see a Transition Period as being highly undesirable for many reasons. In the case of the UK’s fishing industry, it could mean disaster, according to what Fishing For Leave have told us. Here is their spokesman Alan Hastings talking to us yesterday:-
“Due to the existential threat which the Transition Period and the continued submission to the EU’s disastrous Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) and its failed methods presents to what's left of the British fishing industry, it is vital the government fulfils taking back control on this acid test, by not continuing or replicating the CFP AFTER we officially leave in March 2019.
“The government must implement a new, bespoke, and decent independent British policy. Failure to do this will condemn another British industry to be consigned to the museum and the memory.
“This would be a second sacrifice of an industry that is symbolic of our island nation and of taking back control. It would see the Conservatives eradicated in coastal constituencies from Cornwall to NE Scotland.”
- Interview with Alan Hastings, Fishing for Leave Spokesman, 10 Mar 2018
During the Transition Period as it has been described, the UK will have no say on anything. Unless the fishing industry is specifically exempted, Britain’s fishermen will be trapped in the regime of the CFP and the EU can enact whatever changes it wants. The UK government will be powerless. These changes are likely to lead to the further erosion of the UK’s fleet.
“The EU can implement detrimental policy to cull the UK fleet which would allow the EU to claim the “surplus” resources the UK no longer had the fleet capacity to catch under the provisions of the UN Convention on the Law Of the Sea (UNCLOS) Article 62.2.
“The EU uses a quota system to manage mixed fisheries. Fishermen cannot help but catch a mix of species and are forced to discard the "wrong" species they have no quota to keep. They then have to catch more than necessary whilst attempting to find the "right" species they can keep.”
- Briefing paper for the ERG, 06 Mar 2018
This is the so-called “discard” system which is so controversial and which is closely linked to the “choke” debate. Bear with us while we explain.
Next year the EU intend to ban the discarding of fish which are caught in a mixed catch and which must be thrown back to stop the boat going over its quota on particular species. They plan to install CCTV to stop boats sifting through their mixed catch and throwing back dead fish from over-quota species.
“If a full CCTV enforced discard ban is implemented, fishing must stop on exhausting the lowest quota allocation as otherwise vessels would keep catching the species they have no quota for whilst looking for others.
“These are called 'choke species' as they choke/shut down boats, fisheries or areas, stopping vessels from catching their full allocation of quota which they must take in order to be viable.
“Government studies show that “choke species” will result in approximately 60% of the fish resources Britain is allocated going uncaught and a similar proportion of the fleet will go bankrupt as a result.”
- Briefing paper for the ERG, 06 Mar 2018
If the CFP continues after March 2019, and if the UK’s waters finally become the property of the United Kingdom again after that, the UK fishing fleet will be of an insufficient size to take advantage of this, says Fishing for Leave.
The UN has an international agreement called UNCLOS – the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea, which regulates fishing. Under this convention any country that doesn’t have the ability to fish its own waters to full effect must allow other countries’ boats to do so. The UK would therefore have to give foreign vessels (predominantly from the EU) access to its territorial waters.
In effect, the EU could create the conditions where the UK doesn’t have a sufficient fishing fleet to fish its own waters. By the time the UK formally leaves the EU and leaves the Transition Period, the EU would simply have the right to continue fishing in UK waters.
A classic Catch-22.
Here are the closing statements of the document which Mr Jacob Rees-Mogg and his colleagues received last week:-
  • Fishing must be exempted from a transition or the EU will cull our fleet to claim our “surplus” resources. We must leave the CFP as of March 2019
  • A clear unequivocal clause is enacted in the transition/withdrawal treaty so that all rights and obligations are stated to cease to apply as per Article 70 of the Vienna Convention
  • Arrangements on shares of resources and access to waters must not be coupled to wider trade negotiations where it becomes a bartering chip
  • New, bespoke, discard free UK policy is enacted so we have environmentally and economically decent policy to rejuvenate UK communities & avoid shadow dancing the CFP
We hope and pray that fishing and Britain’s coastal communities do not get mangled in the wider political context as we leave. A cheap failure on fishing will snatch a defeat from the jaws of victory and see the conservatives eradiated in coastal constituencies from Cornwall to NE Scotland when fishing is an easy beacon of success if we walk away, take back control and implement new policy.”
- Briefing paper for the ERG, 06 Mar 2018
Finally, if you would like a fuller understanding of all the issues, here is an excellent paper written by the Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP for the Think-Tank UK2020 in November last year. This builds on considerable work that Mr Paterson has done over the years.
Back in 2005 he wrote a Conservative 'Green Paper' which was adopted by the then Leader, Michael Howard. In it, the policy clearly laid out is to leave the Common Fisheries Policy, as part of a gradual withdrawal from aspects of EU membership. You can read this report here.
It is quite possible that Mrs May is unaware of the long-standing Conservative commitment to leaving the Common Fisheries Policy of the EU. In which case, we will simply say 'You're welcome Madam'.
Here is what Mrs May said about fisheries in her Mansion House speech on 02 March:
“We are also leaving the Common Fisheries Policy. The UK will regain control over our domestic fisheries management rules and access to our waters.”
“But as part of our economic partnership we will want to continue to work together to manage shared stocks in a sustainable way and to agree reciprocal access to waters and a fairer allocation of fishing opportunities for the UK fishing industry.”
The first part of this is exactly right. The second part isn’t. The Prime Minister must be helped to understand that there are special circumstances surrounding the UK’s fishing industry and it must be excluded from any Transition deal.
If we had our way, there wouldn’t be a Transition deal at all of course.
We have long argued that the Transition Period is a canard. The government continues to refer to it as an ‘Implementation Period’, but whatever it is called it requires that something specific and agreed is being transitioned to, or implemented. Thus far there is no sign of anything other than it being a period where the status quo reigns but without the benefit of the UK having any say in what is done or planned by the EU.
We are grateful to Fishing For Leave and to certain politicians who provided valuable assistance in the writing of this article.
If you can help us to keep producing important journalism like this – and the article below – please donate a little something if you can.
“We deeply appreciate any inroads you can make with getting this highlighted as too many in positions of influence don’t yet get the full magnitude of the situation we are digging ourselves into.”
What Alan Hastings of Fishing for Leave said was right. We need to keep trying to get the facts and analysis out there. With your help we can keep doing this.
[ Sources: Fishing For Leave | Confidential political sources ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        07.20am, 11 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Shieldsman, Surrey      Date/Time: 11 Mar 2018, 10.27am
Message: 'Fish and Chips' a staple part of the diet for many Brits, even during WWII. (Though perhaps not for the PM and Chancellor.) We are a nett importer of fish, so who caught the Cod and Haddock we eat? Probably the fishing fleets of Iceland and Norway. Before we even get OUR fish back the PM and Chancellor are proposing giving it away again like Ted Heath.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
                                    © SA Today
(To see all parts of our Special Report on the EU and South Africa, click here)
There’s a real crisis in South Africa.
It has been developing for years and has got much worse recently.
You’re not seeing it on your TV screens. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t happening.
So far, despite the EU's love-in with Africa in recent years,
the EU hasn't uttered a word about this.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org spoke exclusively to someone who has just returned from an investigative trip to South Africa – Ms Katie Hopkins. For those who don’t know her, Ms Hopkins is a journalist formerly of the Sun and then the MailOnline - until last year when she was forced out for her strong opinions.
Katie Hopkins is the bête noire for the Left, the uncomfortable truth for some MPs and MEPs in the centre ground of UK and EU politics, and the golden girl for many of those on the Right.
The calm surrounds of her Devon home in England with her husband and children are a long way from the dangers faced by ordinary people in South Africa – dangers faced by Ms Hopkins when she left the security of rural Devon and ventured out there with a film crew last month.
Left: Katie Hopkins
What follows are edited highlights of Katie’s conversation with our Editor. To get the best out of what follows we recommend reading Part 1 of this series so that you know who the main players in this drama are.
Q: People in the UK and the rest of the EU are not seeing on their TV news what’s happening in South Africa. What’s the situation?
“There are accounts of tortures and murders which is terrible and people can see and understand that. It’s the easiest to convey to an outsider. But the reality of South Africa is not only the farm murders, that’s not the whole story.
The rest of the story is the ANC [governing party], who are the front-facing voice with Cyril Ramaphosa seeming very reasonable, etc, saying he’s going to sort out corruption.
The view from those good people who still work inside the structures in South Africa is that the Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) are the real face of South African politics. The EFF are the ones with red berets you’ll have seen, singing “Kill the Boers, kill the white man” in the street, making throat-slitting actions, etc. They sit in the South African parliament like a little group of soldiers.
The big thing is that farm murders are actually a consequence of the policies of the ANC’s capitulation on land expropriation because Cyril Ramaphosa now says it is policy. It can be taken back without compensation. The EFF translates that as “kill white farmers”.
So in a way the story is the other way around – the cause is what’s happened in parliament last week – acting to take people’s property - and the effect is the story I’ve told about genocide of whites in South Africa.”
Below is a video of Julius Malema. Mr Malema is the President & “Commander in Chief” of the EFF, the Marxist-Leninist party which proposed the motion to confiscate land and assets from the people. Here he is speaking in the debate in the South African parliament.
Ms Hopkins, is South Africa still a legitimate member of the international community?
“With the expropriation of property of course it can’t be seen as a legitimate state.
The Cape Town water crisis shows this. They can’t guarantee water security and coming up the pipeline is to become a net importer of food. Very soon they won’t be able to guarantee food security. If you can’t guarantee food and water, what else is there before you become not viable as a country?
The EFF support rate is going up exponentially from what I’ve seen. They love the way Julius Malema talks and what he says, about killing whites. He speaks a language they understand.
The EFF work force is going around organising these gangs that attack farmers – they go, they pretend to be a farm worker, they infiltrate the farm, they get all the knowledge about the farm, and then they’re the link man for the attack. And the police are working with them. If you get arrested and you’re an EFF supporter, you’re a brother and you’re let go or your file is lost.
We have evidence on camera of serving policemen telling us that the police are equipping farm attackers with the weapons they need for the attacks. It’s a lot more sinister than a couple of people doing murders.”
What would you like the EU, the British government, and the governments of other EU countries to do?
“Okay, three things:-
1. They could at least recognise it. They could acknowledge that it’s happening and that it’s an issue. That taking back land without compensation has ramifications on the ground. And the uptick in murder rate in the last two years is significant.
2. They – the UK, parts of Europe, Australia, the US, and Holland in particular because of the language and cultural links – could offer immediate asylum to white South Africans and offer to help their passage for those who can’t afford to leave the land and who are too poor. They need emergency asylum. They want to work. They still want to work hard as they do in South Africa.
3. Finally I want a commitment from the EU and from the main international aid donors that they are not going to deliver aid when South Africa can no longer feed itself. It happened in Zimbabwe and we gave them food aid. Please spend that aid on getting asylum for white farmers who – it is predicted – will be genocided out of the country within a 3-year time period.
That’s my big emotional plea.”
Do you have any final thoughts for our readers?
“My final thoughts: For me as a mum of three kids, at night sometimes my little boy thinks that monsters come. I can tell him they don’t.
On South African farms, when you hear a noise at night it really could be the monster. The husband and the wife get their guns and prepare themselves to defend their children from real monsters. That’s the reality and that’s what I hope your readers might think about.”
Katie Hopkins went to South Africa at great personal risk. Yes, people says she’s a marmite character and some readers will hate the fact that we chose to interview her at all. Too bad. She actually went out there to see for herself and to fact find, which is more than many journalists have done.
                                    © Katie Hopkins
Ms Hopkins is one of several people we have spoken to during this series who have had direct and personal experience of what is happening in South Africa.
The excerpts above are just that and you can see much more at her website. Suffice it to say that we saw nothing phoney about her passion and her concern for people who have nowhere to turn and who are being ignored by the governments and aid agencies of the world.
Given the big noise the EU is constantly making about its relationship with Africa, and all the numerous agreements it has signed with South Africa over the last 25 years, you would have thought the EU would have said something, if it is not to seem grossly hypocritical.
There are two major concerns it could be addressing. Firstly there’s the urgent humanitarian concern for the lives of the predominantly white farmers in the rural areas of South Africa, made worse by the apparent corruption endemic within the police and security forces.
Secondly there is the planned land grab, which will virtually turn South Africa into a communist state. It is this pseudo legal move which is giving a spur to the terrorists in the rural areas.
Some members of the EU Commission are former communists, not the least of whom being the EU’s de facto Foreign Secretary Federica Mogherini. It seems that the Commissioners are happy to stand by, saying nothing, while a major ‘partner’ (according to all their PR for many years) falls into decay and ruin, and runs the serious risk of becoming a failed communist state like Venezuela.
Over the last few weeks Brexit Facts4EU.Org has been speaking to people in South Africa in an attempt to get as many facts as possible. This has not been easy but in the next article we will be able to show the reality of what has been happening, in facts and figures. We will also publish what some key players told us directly.
In the next article we will sum up the problem with the EU’s foreign policy approach to South Africa – which personifies its poor performance in all other foreign policy spheres. We will comment on why the EU should allow the UK and USA to lead on a programme of pressure which needs to be brought to bear on the South African government.
Once again we make a plea for anyone who is not already a donor to make a small contribution. We rely solely on individual members of the public like you in order to bring you such a range of facts and analysis.
[ Sources: Katie Hopkins | My Africa | SA Today ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       07.30am, 11 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: SB, UK      Date/Time: 16 Mar 2018, 07.08am
Message: I admire you very much for your call for Europeans to help South African farmers. The facts as seen through the eyes of Lauren Southern turn my stomach and I am sure that is only half the nasty story as Katie seems to be proving. What will be in South Africa when the farmers are gone or all been killed off? I doubt whether the farms will survive and then what? Of course underneath all of this is creeping communism. The world is under attack at the present from Socialism in all of its nasty forms.
With the government now talking of giving away fishing rights as part of its Brexit negotiations with the EU, we shine a light on this little understood area.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org is once again the first to bring you the real facts about this contentious area of EU membership, in an easy-to-understand graphic form.
  • In each of the last 25 years, UK has lost an average of 4 boats per week from the fleet
  • In some years, as many as 20 boats per week were mothballed or scrapped
  • Fleet has almost halved in 25 years
  • The UK - a maritime, island nation - has become a net importer of fish
Here is what the Prime Minister said in her Mansion House speech a week ago last Friday:
“But as part of our economic partnership we will want to continue to work together to manage shared stocks in a sustainable way and to agree reciprocal access to waters and a fairer allocation of fishing opportunities for the UK fishing industry.”
- Rt Hon Theresa May MP, Prime Minister, London, 02 Mar 2018
Firstly let’s look at the bald facts. We looked at four key metrics:-
  • The size of the fleet in numbers of boats
  • Numbers of fishermen employed
  • The tonnage of fish landed by British boats
  • The tonnage of fish imported
  • The UK increasingly becoming a new importer
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
We first started investigating the Common Fisheries Policy after speaking to the Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP last year. Mr Paterson was Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs from 2012 until 2014, having been Northern Ireland Secretary before that.
This is a man to be listened to on all matters relating to DEFRA business and the N.I. border, unless you have no interest in learning from someone with immense experience and knowledge.
“Of all the environmental damage that European policy has done, perhaps the worst has been to fisheries.
“The Common Fisheries Policy has been a biological, environmental, economic and social disaster; it is beyond reform.
“It is a system that has forced fishermen to throw back more fish dead into the sea than they have landed. It has caused substantial degradation of the marine environment.
“It has destroyed much of the fishing industry, with compulsory scrapping of modern vessels. It has devastated fishing communities.”
Like almost anything connected with the EU, the CFP is immensely complicated. To make matters worse it has changed many times in its scope and in the way it dictates what member states can do.
The CFP introduced quotas known as the Total Allowable Catch (TAC). As Owen Paterson points out, this has resulted in appalling waste, with fishermen throwing catches back into the sea when they went over their TAC quota.
In 1991 the European Court of Justice (CJEU) overruled a decision in the British courts and legalised the practice of quota hopping.
This allowed national fleets – most notably the Spanish - to register their boats in other member states to avoid fishing restrictions. The Spanish quickly bought up the quotas of member states who had no need of them. This resulted in yet another gross distortion of the market. The losers of course were the British, who played by the rules.
The first Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) was first formulated in the Treaty of Rome and it has been modified many times since. The original idea was to make the fishing grounds of EU member states a common resource for all members. The CFP is now presented as having the aim of conservation – protecting the fish stocks and the marine environment.
As with so many things related to the EU, the theory has been far removed from the reality it has produced.
As always, the facts come from official sources. In this case we were also able to access archived data from the Marine Management Organisation (MMO) and its antecedents going back many years. The MMO is the UK government agency in charge and it provides figures to the EU. We also researched information from many other official sources.
For the UK with its long tradition of its coastal communities earning a living from the sea, the EU's Common Fisheries Policy has been little short of a disaster.
Massive reductions in the UK’s fishing fleet, huge job losses, coastal communities transformed and depressed, and the marine environment threatened.
On top of this the UK, with some of the richest fishing waters in the world and a proud history of being a maritime nation, has been reduced to being a net importer of fish.
In what universe can anyone imagine the UK being a net importer of fish? Just look at the map. The UK is an island for goodness’ sake.
It is said that the Chancellor Philip Hammond is looking at the UK’s fishing industry in terms of numbers. It may be true that the UK’s fishing fleet doesn’t currently generate an enormous income compared to, say, the car industry, but that is precisely why it needs to have the freedom it once enjoyed.
In addition he may wish to reflect on the fact that because of the UK’s forced adherence to the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy over so many years, the net trade imbalance in fish in 2016 was over £1.4 billion, in the EU’s favour.
It is this site's policy to campaign for the complete extrication of the UK from the Common Fisheries Policy, with no 'fudges' or 'compromises'. This is one of the many red lines involved in something called 'Leaving the EU' which the majority of the British people voted for in 2016.
[ Sources: Rt Hon Owen Paterson MP | Marine Management Organisation | DEFRA | EU Commission | EU Parliament | Archives of Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Foods ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        07.20am, 10 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jeremy M, Surrey      Date/Time: 10 Mar 2018, 9.21pm
Message: I have never been on a trawler in the North Sea and I can't imagine myself as a trawlerman. I wouldn't have the guts to do it and take my hat off to those who do this job for a living. So sorry we've let you down thanks to the EU and a generally weak UK government over the years. Time for the gloves to come off. I hope our Prime Minister will read this artcile by Facts4EU and will stand firm. Our fishermen must 'come home'.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 10 Mar 2018, 6.12pm
Message: Sovereignty, sovereignty, sovereignty. The three most important aims of leaving the EU. The sovereign UK Parliament 650 MP's elected by us the UK electorate to make the laws that govern and that we live by. The sovereign Parliament that can decide who and what the access to the UK's sovereign waters should be. I hope the EU mandarins, British remoaner MP's, and civil servants can understand that that's what we voted for. Now just get on and deliver.
Name: Chris, Devizes      Date/Time: 10 Mar 2018, 1.40pm
Message: The only good thing about this, is that it may well be the straw which broke the camel's back, regarding the 62 Tory Brexiteers. Hopefully, they will feel she has gone way too far this time and submit their 'no confidence' letters to the 1922 committee. That will trigger an automatic leadership contest, and she will have to stand down. She is without doubt the most useless, incompetent, spineless, and treacherous PM the country has ever had.
Name: Vanessa, Southern England      Date/Time: 10 Mar 2018, 10.56am
Message: This is how Remainers are betraying Brexit - drip by drip. Even if Theresa May is genuine in trying to deliver Brexit, as a Remainer she cannot understand the spirit of Brexit and she clearly has no vision for the future of Britain post-Brexit. Like all Remainers, she sees life outside the EU as being just that: life outside the EU, not life lived freely in the rest of the world. That's why she can give away large chunks of the autonomy we voted for without understanding their importance.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Janice Atkinson MEP                                                 © MENL
Below is an article by the British MEP Janice Atkinson, which she has written in reply to a piece by Conservative MP Michael Fabricant in Wednesday's Daily Telegraph.
In her reply, Ms Atkinson ranges far and wide over the newly emerging political landscape of the post-conception and pre-delivery Brexit across the EU.
Don't forget, the members of the EU Parliament have an effective veto over any deal agreed between the British government and the EU Council of Donald Tusk and the EU Commission of Jean-Claude Juncker.
The article is a good read in our opinion, and raises good questions as well as providing some information not readily available in the mainstream media. See what you think.
By Janice Atkinson, independent MEP and
Vice-President of the Europe of Nations and Freedom group
Michael Fabricant said in Wednesday's Daily Telegraph that he would like to see other nations leaving the EU but there is a flaw in his plan.
As this illiberal, populist crackpot leaves the bed she occupies with Marine Le Pen, Viktor Orban and the rest of the unsavoury EU toxic coalition who want Britain to succeed and who back Brexit, I’d like to remind him that there will be no other EU nations joining the UK in ‘break[ing] free from the shackles of the EU’ without the people he derides.
In his piece, there were quite a number of factually incorrect statements. The M5S [5 Star Movement] does not sit with the Lega Nord in the EU Parliament. The M5S sits with Nigel Farage’s UKIP, a rather unholy alliance as the M5S is a green/left/high tax party that tried leaving Nigel’s group last year to ally with Verhofstadt’s liberals, who rejected them.
The Conservative party’s allies in the EU Parliament are the ruling Polish party, the right wing populist PiS who are currently being sanctioned by the EU for implementing their democratic mandate at home. The EU recently removed the MEP elected cross-party PiS vice president of the Parliament as they did not like his views. The Conservatives’ natural ally, Hungary’s Viktor Orban (populist), is being taken to court because his government, along with those of the Czech Republic and Poland, are refusing to accept mandatory migrant quotas. Who are the authoritarians here? Orban’s Fidesz sits with Merkel’s bloc.
                                                 © Daily Telegraph
My friend and close colleague, Matteo Salvini, had a great success in the weekend’s elections in Italy. He is accused by Mr Fabricant of veering into xenophobia because he wants to deport illegal immigrants. That’s what Italy’s voters asked him to do. According to the EU’s own figures, 40% of rapes in Italy are committed by foreigners and immigrants make up 32.6% of its prison population (2015 latest figures). There has been a 15% year-on-year rise in the number of migrants reaching Italy. There are around 5.4 million illegal immigrants plus 200,000 who are classified as asylum seekers. Salvini wants to deport 500,000. Mr Fabricant also called him ‘unsavoury’ and a former communist. Salvini would like to see a 15% flat tax.
The reality is that the EU authoritarians are seeing the voters reject their policies by voting for populists and that is why we have seen a bit of a reality check with Verhofstadt this week peddling a softer approach to Brexit. They’re scared. And it’s my friends who are making them change their minds.
Presumably, Mr Fabricant would not like these populists supporting a good trade deal, including services, for Britain, which the Polish PiS does? Presumably, he does not support President Trump, a populist, who wants to put the UK ‘at the front of the queue’ for a trade deal? Presumably he does not support US Secretary of State Wilbur Ross, who told me in Washington in December, “Janice, do not accept the poison pill of an EU trade deal if you want a good deal with us”. He also told other MEPs present in the room that they were protectionist and didn’t understand free trade.
I do not understand who he thinks the Conservatives' allies are that are likely to follow us and Exit?
It is the Conservatives' traditional allies in the EU who are obstructing Brexit and trying to damage Britain because their ideological federalist future is at stake. Mr Fabricant should also be careful about the language he uses. It is interesting to note that the hyperbole of our opposition in the Parliament changed quite dramatically when they realised that their own voters felt alienated from the traditional old guard parties for using the terms ‘xenophobe’ and ‘racist’. Instead, they now call us populists which, according to the Oxford Dictionary, means representing the ordinary people. We’re happy with that.
There is a populist wave across the EU and I predict another earthquake when my friends in Nigel Farage’s group, the Swedish Democrats, win their elections in September. They are also supporters of Brexit. The Scandinavian countries’ electorates are also rebelling because they’ve had enough of the liberal left and migration.
Italy will have its populist government. Even the Greeks and the Spanish have new populist (conservative) break-aways from the traditional conservative parties. Vox in Spain and Nea Dexia in Greece are all conservatives and, like many UKIP members, felt their conservatives parties had abandoned conservatism. They are all Eurosceptics. They will win MEP seats. Bulgaria has already elected eleven populist MPs in the new party, Volya, and will do well in the 2019 European elections.
I left the Conservative party in 2011 because they were only conservative in name, not in actions. I am still a conservative, Thatcher is still my hero. But I have been more pragmatic than Mr Fabricant and have chosen my political friends and allies because they are conservatives or libertarian in some cases.
What unites us all on the populist right, however, is a love of our countries, belief in the nation state and its sovereignty, taking back control of our borders, abandoning Schengen, opposition to forced migrant quotas for failed open door EU policies, a belief in trading and co-operation without the euro and protectionist trade policies, lower taxes and rolling back the state.
Does this remind you of Taking Back Control, Mr Fabricant?
© Janice Atkinson MEP
Brexit Facts4EU maintains its policy of representing as many Brexit views as possible and we're very pleased to publish Janice Atkinson's article.
Conservative, UKIP, and Independent MEPS know that we are very happy to publish their views too.
There are no Labour or Liberal Democrat MEPs who are pro-Brexit, and they get enough publicity for their views from the pro-Remain BBC, but if they would like to send us something we would also publish that.
[ Sources: Janice Atkinson MEP ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        09.25am, 09 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
President (unelected) Tusk yesterday in Dublin                          © EU Council
Yesterday the EU Council President (unelected) Donald Tusk flew to Dublin to make a speech to the cameras.
You can watch his speech here or you can read it below. For our analysis, please see ‘Observations’ below the transcript.
“I have come to Dublin to consult with the Taoiseach and discuss Ireland's concerns on several important issues ahead of the European Council in two weeks. The European Union is a family of free nations, linked by values. For sure, we may not always be in agreement on everything. But in times of trouble, families come together and stand with each other. For the EU27, this is especially true when we talk about Brexit.”
“In December, also with the active participation of the Taoiseach, we addressed the most difficult issues resulting from the UK's departure in 2019. Without the progress achieved in December, moving to the second phase of negotiations would not have been possible. But we also have to be clear that any backsliding on the commitments made so far would create a risk to further progress in Brexit negotiations. This applies also to the question of avoiding a hard border.”
“When I was in London last week, I heard very critical comments by Prime Minister May, and others, about the way the Irish border issue was presented in the draft Withdrawal Agreement.”
“We know today that the UK government rejects: "a customs and regulatory border down the Irish Sea"; the EU Single Market and the customs union. While we must respect this position, we also expect the UK to propose a specific and realistic solution to avoid a hard border. As long as the UK doesn't present such a solution, it is very difficult to imagine substantive progress in Brexit negotiations. If in London someone assumes that the negotiations will deal with other issues first, before moving to the Irish issue, my response would be: Ireland first.
“Next month marks the 20th anniversary of the Good Friday Agreement, ratified by large majorities North and South of the border. We must recognise the democratic decision taken by Britain to leave the EU in 2016, just as we must recognise the democratic decision made on the island of Ireland in 1998 with all its consequences. The risk of destabilising the fragile peace process must be avoided at all costs. So we will be firm on this.”
“Yesterday in Luxembourg, I presented my draft guidelines to shape our future relationship with the UK after Brexit. Also yesterday, the UK Chancellor made a speech, in the City of London, arguing for a bespoke deal or an ambitious FTA covering financial services. So let me refer to this issue of such great interest to London.”
“In the FTA we can offer trade in goods, with the aim of covering all sectors, subject to zero tariffs and no quantitative restrictions. But services are not about tariffs. Services are about common rules, common supervision, and common enforcement. To ensure a level playing field. To ensure the integrity of the Single Market. And ultimately also to ensure financial stability. This is why we cannot offer the same in services as we can offer in goods. And it's also why FTAs don't have detailed rules for financial services. We should all be clear that also when it comes to financial services, life will be different after Brexit.”
“I also heard the Chancellor's words about financial services being "very much in the mutual interest" of the UK and EU. I fully respect the Chancellor's competence in defining what's in the UK's interest. I would, however, ask to allow us to define what's in the EU's interest.”
“Finally, let me add that during my visit in Luxembourg yesterday, I experienced what European solidarity with Ireland means. As you know, every country has its own problems resulting from Brexit. So does Luxembourg. But one of the first issues raised by Prime Minister Bettel in our conversation, was the issue of our common position regarding Ireland. Since my last visit here in Dublin, I have spoken to virtually every EU leader, and every one of them – without exception – declared, just like Prime Minister Bettel did yesterday, that among their priorities are: protecting the peace process, and avoiding a hard border. The EU stands by Ireland. This is a matter between the EU27 and UK, not Ireland and the UK. Thank you.”
Fresh from insulting the UK on Wednesday, EU Council President (unelected) Donald Tusk flew to Dublin yesterday for a meeting with the Europhiliac Irish T-something Leo Varadkar to discuss Brexit yet again.
This was very clearly not a meeting that was needed. We assume they still have telephones in Brussels. This was for show. Mr Tusk lost no time in making a statement which presumably was designed to sound tough but which will have the effect of further alienating all decent British people today, and which is now starting to sound hollow in parts of the EU27 too.
On Wednesday we heard a continuation of the outright lies from Tusk, when he said: “we want to remain friends and partners also after Brexit. Partners that are as close as possible, just like we have said from the very first day after the referendum.” It seems we need to remind Tusk what his friend and colleague Jean-Claude said on the day that Tusk refers to: 24th June 2016:
“This will not be an amicable divorce.”
- EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, 24 June 2016
Maybe that’s what passes for friendly where Tusk comes from, but it won’t wash in the UK.
We wonder how the people of Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland felt yesterday, when a miserable, unelected, Polish bureaucrat from Brussels flew in to Dublin to tell them “This is a matter between the EU27 and UK, not Ireland and the UK”?
The EU were nowhere near the Good Friday Agreement until Michel Barnier – then a Commissioner - swanned in at the last minute to pretend the EU had an involvement. They didn’t. Ask those politicians who actually were there, year after year, month after month, week after week.
Whilst it’s true that the border will be an external border of the EU, so is the border between Norway and Sweden, as well as many other borders around the EU where all manner of special arrangements exist on a daily basis. Funny how life goes on there, just fine.
Make no mistake, the Irish border is being used by the EU purely as a political tool. Unfortunately some inexperienced Irish politicians are falling for the EU’s unsavoury shenanigans. The UK government has never once sought to make the border an issue – quite the reverse, as we show in the next article.
Whilst we deplore the British government’s typically-useless handling of this from a PR perspective – constantly allowing Tusk to pretend that the UK has proposed nothing – the fact is that the UK has proposed solutions and the EU doesn’t want to discuss them because of its games-playing.
In this context may we recommend our article below?
[ Sources: EU Council ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        07.20am, 09 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 09 Mar 2018, 09.53am
Message: The Irish border should be about the relationship between the UK and Eire. Unfortunately when you have signed away your sovereignty as Eire have, while the sovereign UK are about to regain theirs, you are not negotiating like to like. The relationship is sovereign country UK, negotiating with dictatorship the EU. Eire are doing what they are told by their political masters in Brussels, unfortunately for Eire. Brussels may have a different agenda. If the EU forces a hard border on Eire, the economic consequence may be dire - more than 70% of Irish exports cross that border. Given free will, Eire would without doubt negotiate an agreement with UK, the pity is they won't be offered the chance.
Name: Paul A, East Sussex      Date/Time: 09 Mar 2018, 09.01am
Message: It's shameless, but par for the course, that the EU refused to accept nor respect the Irish democratic right when they, quite sensibly, voted against the Lisbon treaty. They now insist that the Irish have democratic rights which must be respected for the 'hard border' that THEY seem to want. Seems like cherry picking on a trumped up non event manufactured just to avoid their real problem. The EU is like a snake writhing in it's death throes.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
A top civil servant to be proud of                                                  © Parliament
The questions around the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland keep being dragged out by the EU and by Remoaner politicians in the UK.
What follows shines a light on the solutions and also shows that there is one civil servant who should be given the top job in Whitehall.
  • No infrastructure between N.I. and Ireland is required under any circumstances
  • HMRC boss tells it like it is over Irish question
  • New customs system on schedule and will be online two months before exit
  • Irish and French customs won’t discuss new arrangements with HMRC
Mr Jon Thompson is Chief Executive and Permanent Secretary at HM Revenue and Customs, and his minister is the Chancellor, Philip Hammond. We strongly recommend viewing his testimony to the Exiting the European Union Committee, which he gave on Wednesday 29 November 2017.
PLEASE NOTE: Sometimes the House of Commons system can take a minute or two to load.
Please be patient - this video is worth watching!
NOTE: The testimony below was given three months ago but it is highly relevant given President Tusk’s aggressive comments yesterday.
On the new Customs Declaration Service:
“Actually the project is completely on track. We have every confidence it will be completed by January 2019. The project has met all of its milestones in the current year. Traders will begin the migration to the new system in July 2018.”
On the Transition Period – Q: “Is it your anticipation that things will just carry on as they are at the moment?”
A: “Yes.”
Northern Ireland – Q: “The government wants no border and no infrastructure - how can the government’s policy be achieved?”
“The assumption is there’s a negotiated settlement with the EU in which the highly streamlined customs arrangement is adopted. We stay in the common transit convention, there’s mutual recognition of the authorised economic operator sheme, and so on.” [Mr Thompson refers the Committee to the government papers issued on this question in August 2017.]
“Because of the unique Northern Ireland/Ireland situation you need to add on three additional things which are set out in the NI paper.”
“First of all to maximise the authorised economic operator scheme, secondly to seek a derogation for small traders because there needs to be a recognition that the border area is very much a local economy in which traders cross the border on a regular basis, and thirdly that we would move to a system of self-assessment, which is set out in the Union Customs Code and which is very much the direction of travel for the European Union.”
“We believe that would cover the vast majority of trade between Ireland and Northern Ireland. If there were any checks they would be risk and intelligence based checks and they would take place well away from the legal border.”
Q: “In the event of no deal, would it be possible to achieve no border infrastructure?”
A: “It’s possible for the government to make a unilateral decision of what it will do at the border, which would be in line to my answer to your previous question. We do not believe we require any infrastructure between Northern Ireland and Ireland under any circumstances.”
Q: “Have you had any dealings with the Irish about this?”
A: “There are no formal conversations with either the French or the Irish. We cannot talk to Customs or taxation management organsiations in either of those countries. There are only informal conversations with the Belgians and the Dutch.”
Q: “From everything you’ve said, this isn’t much of an issue, or am I missing something? From our point of view, there’s no reason why it can’t be business as usual?”
“That is correct. That is correct. That is the consistent advice we have given ministers.”
On the Irish border question, it’s perfectly obvious that political games are being played – by the EU and by Remoaner MPs.
There is ample evidence for this, including a report from the EU Parliament last year which the EU conveniently keeps forgetting about. The UK government issued two papers on how to deal with the issue last July, but the EU and Remoaner MPs keep ignoring those too.
Mr Thompson’s evidence to the Exiting the EU Committee was something we relished when we first heard it in November. Unfortunately at the time we were just too under-resourced to bring it to you. We’re still massively under-resourced but it has risen to the top of the pile as a result of the continuing nonsense spewing out of the mouths of the likes of President Tusk, Guy Verhopeless MEP, and all manner of Remoaner MPs.
We’ve watched a LOT of Commons committees looking into Brexit. We’ve watched both ministers and civil servants answering - or generally not answering - questions.
Mr Jon Thompson is like a breath of fresh air. As Chief Executive and Permanent Secretary at HM Revenue and Customs, he is a very senior man in Her Majesty’s Civil Service. And yet to look at and to listen to him, you would never know it.
Move aside Sir Jeremy Heywood, Head of the Civil Service. Make way for action man Thompson.
                                                  © Jon Thompson
Mr Thompson gives straight answers to questions. In his exchanges with Commons committees his answers are sometimes shorter than the questions. He sounds like a businessman, not a mandarin being kept from his favourite armchair in the Drones Club.
Good ’eavens, he doesn’t even speak in the refined tones of the Eton and Oxbridge educated. (He attended Anglia Poly.)
For a man without all the trappings of the ‘Humphrey's’ of the Whitehall elites, to have risen to the top job in one of the most important departments in government, he has to have something special. From what we can see without ever having met him, Mr Thompson has this in droves. He knows his stuff and is obviously on top of his game.
This is a man who could have been in charge of the entire EU’s taxation, customs, and border management without breaking a sweat. He would still have had plenty of time left over to support his beloved Norwich City FC and to have spent time spoiling his grandson.
At the very least he should immediately be made Head of the Civil Service. This is a man who would not have left the country with no plan for a Leave result after the Referendum, as the present incumbent did.
If Thompson had been in charge, we're pretty darned sure the Civil Service would have been ready to leave on June 24th 2016.
[ Sources: Parliament ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        07.20am, 09 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 11 Mar 2018, 05.14am
Message: Mr Jon Thompson, Chief Executive and Permanent Secretary at HMRC, should in my view be commended for being down to earth and straight talking - and answering questions. Dare I suggest, listening to Mr Thompson giving evidence was akin to suggest he is 'one of the people', so to speak? Remoaner MPs would do well to listen to Mr Thompson instead of attempting to spin doom and gloom. They should stop their whining and get behind our country, or resign. Mr Thompson for his part is getting on with the job of assisting to deliver Brexit.
Name: John Finn, Coventry, UK      Date/Time: 09 Mar 2018, 10.24am
Message: I've already watched most of this video and agree with your analysis. To be honest, I'm probably missing something here but I can't see what the problem is. If we revert to WTO rules then surely the UK needs only to ensure that it satisfies WTO requirements regarding "most favoured nation" status. i.e. it cannot apply less rigorous rules for the EU than it does for any other nation. If, on the other hand, we have a FTA then surely the problem disappears anyway. Basically if the UK is confident that it can have a "frictionless" border and keep the WTO happy - What is the issue?

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
This has been a busy last seven days for Brexit documents – both leaked and officially released – and for Brexit statements and questioning sessions. It has also encompassed a major general election.
  • The EU’s draft Withdrawal Agreement (Technically this was released on 28 Feb)
  • Theresa May’s Mansion House speech
  • Italy’s election result, rejecting the EU
  • Philip Hammond at the EU Scrutiny Committee
  • Leak of EU Parliament’s future relationship paper
  • Leak of EU Council’s opinion of Mrs May’s Mansion House speech
  • Statement by EU Council President Donald Tusk on future relationship
Below are two important articles about President Tusk’s statement yesterday, but first you might like to know about the Brexit views of the triumphant Italians celebrating their electoral victories?
Here is what one of the possible future Prime Ministers of Italy, Matteo Salvini of Lega, just said about Brexit:
“Great Britain is a friendly country with a long tradition of trading with Italy. You made a free choice with Brexit and I very much hope that it will be possible to maintain completely open trade with the EU without any penalties.”
Right: Matteo Salvini
Lega’s economics spokesman Claudio Borghi said it would be a mistake to risk Theresa May walking away from negotiations:
“There will be no blind trust in what Germany wants. Punishment or anything of the kind would be sheer stupidity. We export more to the UK than we import back and we certainly don’t want to hurt our own client.”
Meanwhile the Leader of the largest party to come out of the elections, Luigi Di Maio of the eurosceptic 5 Star Movement, said:
“We shouldn’t try to punish the British people for choosing Brexit.”
Left: Luigi Di Maio
Overall the tone in Italy about Brexit has changed at the highest levels. It still remains to be seen which coalition will form the next government but whichever it is, the mood music is now coming from the eurosceptic groups.
[ Sources: Corriere della Sella | Daily Telegraph ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.55am, 08 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
President (unelected) Tusk yesterday                     © EU Council
In yesterday’s press conference in Luxembourg, EU Council President Donald Tusk made an official statement about Brexit. This directly follows Mrs May’s Mansion House speech from Friday, and is in advance of the key EU Council Summit in two weeks’ time.
On 22-23 March, the EU27 leaders will meet and decisions will be made about the latest draft guidelines which President Tusk sent them yesterday morning.
The headline that everyone was supposed to take away from Tusk’s statement was that “Free trade agreement is the only possible model”. This was indeed the headline from the EU press officers and it was dutifully picked up by many in the mainstream media.
Our overriding impression was not this. In fact it had less to do with content and far more to do with presentation, as we commented on yesterday in the article below. We will now turn to the substance of what President Tusk said.
We would like for a moment to single out the UK’s Brexit fishery policy. Here is what Tusk said about fishing yesterday:
“And in fisheries, reciprocal access to fishing waters and resources should be maintained.”
To be clear, he is talking about maintaining the Common Fisheries Policy (CFP) after Brexit. The reason is very simple: like trade, the EU is a massive net beneficiary from the UK of the riches of our seas. This isn’t and never has been ‘reciprocal’ – not in the sense of it working both ways in some kind of balance.
In fact, so one-sided is the CFP that several EU27 countries’ fishing fleets will be decimated when they can no longer raid UK waters. Conversely, the British fishing fleet will finally be able to start on its long journey to recovery.
Tusk’s claim to UK waters follows on from the Prime Minister in her Mansion House speech on Friday:
“But as part of our economic partnership we will want to continue to work together to manage shared stocks in a sustainable way and to agree reciprocal access to waters and a fairer allocation of fishing opportunities for the UK fishing industry.”
President Tusk’s statement contains the same extraordinary contradictions which we have commented on in previous speeches, but which seem to pass by the heads of mainstream journalists sitting there.
In discussing the draft guidelines he had just issued for the EU's post-Brexit relations with the UK, he said: “it will only be a trade agreement”.
Aside from the fact this is all most Brexiteers want, it is simply untrue. The EU wants far more. For example amongst many other things, they’re desperate for the following:-
  • Our money on a continuing basis to help fund their programmes, eg Erasmus+, Copernicus, etc
  • Use of the UK’s substantial intelligence and anti-terror capabilities
  • Use of the UK’s military strength for free
  • Access to the UK’s universities (far more in demand than the EU’s are)
  • Access to London as clearing house for Euro transactions
  • London as provider of most investment finance
  • Our consumers to buy their products
  • And finally, they need our fish
Yesterday the Chancellor Philip Hammond said that reciprocal access to British waters was on the table, and he came in for criticism from some newspapers for saying this. Whilst regular readers will know that Remainer Phil is hardly our favourite person, in this case he was merely repeating government policy.
This is the same policy expounded by his boss the Prime Minister in her speech on Friday. This is the speech that received acclaim from all quarters, even from supposedly pro-Brexit organisations. We came out immediately and condemned the speech based on the facts it contained. Some readers then kindly emailed to say they agreed with our stance.
Regrettably there are some ‘big names’ out there who seem more interested in supporting the government than they do supporting Brexit. If you want a site promoting the views of one party, we’re not it. Instead we offer party-neutral Brexit facts, news and analysis.
[ Sources: EU Council | No.10 ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        6.55am, 08 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Shieldsman, Surrey      Date/Time: 08 Mar 2018, 09.34am
Message: Politicians like Hammond will give everything away for nothing as did Heath and most of the PM's who followed. So the EU still want to fish in our waters and rob us of our fish. Forget it. I am looking forward to the day when I can once again buy fish caught and landed by UK (especially Scottish) fishermen. Our depleted fishing fleets will not be over fishing and will not be subject to Brussels quotas. We can manage it very well ourselves - thank you.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
We will be presenting and commenting on the EU Council’s latest Brexit document overnight, but in the meantime here is President Tusk of the EU Council at the press conference in Luxembourg today, which was called specifically for him to announce the new document.
This is a 2 minute clip of your EU President, answering a question from the BBC. Note: If you are currently feeling a bit down anyway, you may not want to watch this clip.
President Donald Tusk in Luxembourg today                     © EU Council
Seriously? Is this man really our President of the EU Council?
We can only assume that it is finally beginning to dawn on him that Brexit could well be the beginning of the end.
On Sunday the Italian people roundly rejected the EU, voting by almost 70% for eurosceptic and anti-EU parties. This has followed several other elections where ‘populist’ parties have surged against traditional pro-EU parties all over Europe.
Perhaps Mr Tusk is slowly succumbing to despair. Whatever the reason for his appalling performance, you may have your own views about this man still representing you on the world stage.
[ Sources: EU Council ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        5.10pm, 07 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 10.12pm
Message: The EU is fighting on 4 fronts now: Brexit, Italian election result, Visegrad countries migrant refusal, and Trump's possible trade tariffs. The EU are running out of money for their budget, none of the other 27 countries wants to pay more or lose any benefits. The possible trade war with America and a hard Brexit would seriously hit the EU economy. Tusk has every reason to worry - the federal dream is in tatters,there is a weak German government. Margaret Thatcher once said that "The trouble with Socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money" and this has come true. The same applies to the EU.
Yesterday the EU Parliament’s Brexit Coordinator, the Belgian MEP Guy Verhofstadt, visited 10 Downing Street for talks with Theresa May.
On the same day, a draft resolution for his EU parliament was being leaked to an EU political magazine. This document contained a motion for a resolution “to wind up the debate on the framework of the future EU-UK relationship”.
In short, the 13-page document lays down the EU Parliament’s position on all aspects of the future relationship between the EU and the UK.
  • UK to keep and not diverge from all EU legislation and policies in respect of competition
  • Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area requires a binding convergence to EU acquis
  • Requires a binding interpretation role of the CJEU
  • Does not allow cherry-picking of sectors of the internal market
  • Stresses need for high level of alignment between EU VAT Area and UK
  • Seeks alignment of corporation tax schemes
  • Mutual access to waters using Common Fishery Policy principles, policy & laws
  • EU Parliament has veto over eventual deal
We have read all 5,500 words and you can either read them yourself or look at the key excerpts we have selected below.
“protection of the integrity and the correct functioning of the internal market, the customs union and the four freedoms, without allowing for a sector-by-sector approach”
“safeguarding the EU legal order and the role of the CJEU in this respect, a level-playing field, in particular in relation to the United Kingdom’s continued adherence to the standards provided by international obligations and the Union’s legislation and policies in the fields of the fair competition, including state aid, social and workers’ rights, especially safeguards against social dumping, environment, climate change, consumer protection, public health, sanitary and phytosanitary measures, animal health and welfare, the fight against tax evasion and avoidance, money laundering, data protection and privacy, with a clear enforcement mechanism to ensure compliance”
“Recalls that the European Parliament will have to approve any future EU-UK agreement; emphasises that the Parliament must be immediately and fully informed at all stages of the procedure”
Trade and economic relations
“Notes that a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area requires a binding convergence mechanism towards the EU acquis and a binding interpretation role of the CJEU and does not allow cherry-picking of sectors of the internal market”
“the level of access to the EU Market must correspond to the degree of convergence and alignment to the EU technical standards and rules, without any sector-by-sector approach and preserving the integrity of the Single market”
“the EU autonomy in setting EU law and standards must be guaranteed, as well as the role of the CJEU as the sole interpreter of EU law”
“a level playing field is ensured and EU standards are safeguarded and a race to the bottom avoided”
“Stresses that this EU-UK agreement should safeguard the framework of existing commercial relationships between the EU and third countries and avoid any free-riding by ensuring consistency in keeping a tuned tariff and quota system and rules of origin for products vis-à-vis third countries”
“Underlines that a EU-UK agreement should include a robust dispute settlement mechanism as well as governance structures; emphasizes in this regard the competence of the CJEU for the interpretation of questions related to EU law”
“Recalls that the UK’s current position and red lines would lead to customs checks and verification which would affect global supply chains and manufacturing processes, even if tariff barriers can be avoided; underlines the importance of high level of alignment between the Single EU VAT Area and the UK; believes that taxation matters should be integrated in any further agreement between UK and the EU to ensure a maximum level of cooperation between the EU and the UK and its dependent territories in the field of corporate taxation”
“is open to the possibility of the UK continuing to contribute to the EU´s external financing instruments in pursuit of common objectives, especially in the common neighbourhood; calls for close coordination and, where possible, joint programming of assistance provided to third countries”
“Believes that, in light of the above principles and conditions, and in the interest of the passengers, air carriers, manufacturers and workers' unions, connectivity has to be ensured by means of an air transport agreement and aviation safety agreement; stresses however this is conditional on the level of regulatory convergence and alignment with EU acquis, and on the setting up of a solid dispute settlement and arbitration mechanism”
“Could consider with respect to fisheries that a third country-type of bilateral partnership agreement be negotiated with the aim to maintain a high level of cooperation, coherence and convergence, ensuring mutual access to waters and resources in accordance with the CFP principles, policy and governance provisions, and sustainable management of shared stocks; underlines that the common management of shared stocks necessitates a continuation of the UK contribution to the scientific assessment of those stocks; stresses however that reciprocal market access for fishery products has to be negotiated as part of the future agreement, and that the level of access to the EU domestic market must be conditional on the level of access for EU vessels to the UK fishing grounds and their resources”
Level playing field
“Believes that maintaining a level playing field that includes a non-regression clause is necessary, preventing the UK from lowering the relevant standards while fully preserving the autonomy of EU decision-making”
“Notes that the breadth and depth of the agreement on a level-playing field will be essential in determining the extent of the overall future EU-UK relationship; recalls that the continued adherence of the UK to the European social model will play a key role in this”
Transitional period
“transition can only consist of the… continued application of existing EU regulatory, budgetary, supervisory, judicial and enforcement instruments and structures to the UK”
“… all the rights conferred to citizens by Union law should be extended throughout the transition period; stresses that this applies also to EU citizens arriving in the UK during the transition period who should benefit from exactly the same rights especially concerning child benefits, family reunification and access to the judicial redress with the ECJ”
This is only a draft document from the EU parliament. However all other EU draft documents on Brexit which have been leaked like this have then gone on to be produced in final form, substantially unchanged.
It now seems to be standard operating procedure within Brussels to leak major documents to the press first, before issuing them as formal documents a few days later.
It’s important to remember that whilst Verhopeless Verhofstadt might be someone you would bypass in everyday life, he cannot be completely ignored when it comes to Brexit.
He is unfortunately one of those individuals who is determined to wield all the power he has managed to accumulate, and as Brexit Coordinator for the EU parliament he can cause a lot of disruption and nuisance.
One of the Brexit Facts4EU.Org team had experience of life in Eastern Europe as a young person under communism. Before 1990, blocks of apartments had a building informer who would keep watch on the residents and report to the State. She has frequently said that Verhofstadt reminds her of such a building monitor.
In western, supposedly democratic, Brussels in 2018 Verhofstadt is a Eurofanatic, one of the high priests of the EU temple and a true believer. What people actually want doesn’t concern him – he knows what’s best for the peoples of the EU. Come to that he also seems to think he knows what’s best for the British people too.
Right: Guy Verhostadt MEP
In line with most of what Theresa May has been giving away to the EU since she started on the Brexit negotiations, the EU parliament’s document sets out a total capitulation demanded of the UK.
Forget any line-by-line dissection of the text, this document is an absurdity from start to finish. It represents the ghastly mindset of the totalitarians in Brussels who presume to dictate our lives even when we have left. They simply can’t conceive of a world where the UK can be allowed to operate as an independent country.
This document sets out the scenario where the UK remains in the EU, but everyone pretends it has left and it has all voting rights removed as a punishment for voting.
The really sad thing is that Mrs May will doubtless read this and capitulate even more than she has done already.
With apologies to the Conservative MPs who read us, but could you please do something about this woman before she inflicts even more damage to the future of our great country.
[ Sources: ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.45am, 07 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 9.55pm
Message: It is about time Mrs May and her remoaner Minister's grew a pair, in addition to remoaner MPs and peers! Each day that passes is another day lost to enjoy the freedoms our forefathers fought and died for, and another day the UK pays the EU a fortune. Younger generations should be extremely pleased we're 'fighting' so they and their children/grandchildren can grow up in a sovereign independent self-governing nation state, where MPs they elect to OUR Parliament can actually do something in UK interests (and remove them if they don't), without being told they can do little by [usually remainer] civil servants due to EU commission dictats/laws, even when it may better our country, and where the UK Supreme Court will again reign supreme in our country. EU27 leaders must cease their arrogant attitude and put the EU commission in its place. Many times have we all said, the European Union is NOT a country but behaves as though it was. Let EU27 leaders put their own question of membership to the tast before their own people? When all said and done, the UK is not some 'mickey-mouse' outfit they can push around at will. If EU leaders wish to retain good relations with the UK to assist their individual economies, let them show it in the spirit of 'good-neighbourliness'? Their almost continuous and threatening behaviour towards the UK does them no favours, as we only view this in the light of 'me, me, me'! We in the UK know all this is politically driven by the likes of Verhofstadt [former Prime Minister of Belgium] et al. The peoples of the European Union are a pleasant lot and diverse in every way, whilst the EU commission continue to ram you together, whether or not you like it, and whether or not you gave consent. The EU hate popular movements, but I would have thought better to be popular than rammed into a soviet styled bygone era?
Name: Thinker, Lancashire, UK      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 4.26pm
Message: The EU has used our membership of the community as a reason to take 'competitive advantage' of the UK - most especially with regard to the CFP. Returning our fishing waters to our control is not taking 'competitive advantage', it is restoring a status quo that was in operation since international laws first came into existence with regards to a country's waters. The EU seems absolutely terrified of the UK making a success of life outside the EU and that attitude to us implies that they know that membership of the EU is a significant drag factor upon our success in at least as many areas as those they are documenting. These demands are nothing more than hobbles designed to restrain the UK, restricting us to the future progress levels of the EU. I hope that Mrs May rejects them completely in every area because a hobbled UK is not a free UK.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 2.03pm
Message: Fact, Tusk said at press conference today, all the UK will be offered will be a free trade deal. Result, that's all we want, the rest is down to us the British people to trade and set our own laws and Governments.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 12.35pm
Message: How much longer must we endure this meaningless charade with Brussels? Their latest demand is ludicrous and just another absurd threat? We are not Greece, we are Great Britain and we should act accordingly! We must stand up to this bullying! Theresa May must go immediately and get someone in that will stand up to these Brussels bullies once and for all!
Name: Shieldsman, Surrey      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 11.44am
Message: What will the PM's answer be? More appeasement? Her Government still has the task under Article 50 of negotiating withdrawal from the EU. Parliament may think that they have been given the final say on the terms. But that is ignoring the 52% of the voting Public and their decision to leave. Plus the fact that Theresa May has a duty to the membership of the Conservative Party under its constitution. The Italian elections have shown that the EU Parliament is a puppet of the Commission and not a real democracy of the member states.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
We are a small but committed and determined team.
You haven't given up fighting for the clean Brexit you voted for.
Together we're up against a vast army of UK & EU propagandists.
All we have here are our honest tools - research, compelling daily content, simple charts - and our most important resource - you.
Dear reader, we rely completely on voluntary donations from individuals like you. We produce important and original work which gets picked up by the national media and politicians in the UK and internationally.
We badly need your help to keep going, fighting for a full, clean Brexit.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
This list is being updated.
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, Mar 2018
Chancellor Hammond finds anti-Brexit Treasury leak amusing                     © Parliament
As part of our continuing commitment to providing as much openness as possible in respect of the government's plans for Brexit, we present below a video of the Chancellor's appearance before the EU Scrutiny Committee in parliament yesterday.
The Rt Hon Philip Hammond MP appeared alongside his civil servant Mark Bowman, Director General of International Finance at HM Treasury.
Once again, Kate Hoey and David Jones were superb, as was the Chairman Sir Bill Cash. Regrettably the Chancellor was just dreadful as usual. We will make our usual call for him to be fired forthwith for not acting in the national interest.
Once again a civil servant comes across very badly in our opinion, and we urge you to listen carefully to his contributions. We have previously made the same observations about other senior mandarins appearing before this and other select committees.
We repeat our call for there to be a clean-out of senior civil servants in the major departments, as they were all responsible for having done no preparation for a Leave vote. We also consider that their strong pro-EU beliefs make them unsuitable to lead their teams in the best interests of Brexit Britain.
For anyone wanting an example of how Remainer Phil hasn't changed his ardent pro-EU views in any way, here is what he said in response to a question by Kate Hoey:
"Let me say publicly that I don't think the Irish Republic
could be more helpful than it is already being."
Given what we have witnessed and read from the Irish government since the Referendum, this couldn't be more absurd and it perfectly demonstrates the Chancellor's proclivities.
If you would like a second example, watch him grinning through his answer to the question about who leaked the "gloom and doom documents" as Kate Hoey referred to them, or the "cross government economists' analysis" as the Chancellor preferred to call them. It's clear he was very happy they were leaked.
With a Chancellor like this and a Prime Minister who is unable to say she would back Brexit if voting today, it's no wonder the Brexit negotiations are in the state they're in.
[ Sources: Parliament ]      Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.        3.25pm, 06 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Simon Jones, Wiltshire      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 9.22pm
Message: From Hammond's dreary testimony to the Select Committee yesterday and his already out of date speech from today I think you can gather several things about how HMRC view Brexit: Firstly, they have a new economic model to play with but they don't know what the results mean because the EU haven't told the Revenue what questions nor data to apply! It appears, seriously, that they are waiting on the details of the final deal to be agreed so that they can do the sums to decide on the best course of economic action, crucially this means that, viewed like this, it will always be too late to do anything but accept what you are offered, however meagre it is. This all seems too surreal; no wonder there is nothing but drift and apathy from the Treasury. They need to make a choice; in fact, they were handed a choice nearly two years ago but they have totally failed to follow through the logic of both the UK and EU positions. Secondly, Hammond is unable to see his own contradictions; he claims in his speech today that it will not be the EU who benefits from cutting out the financial services hub of London from the deal but New York and Singapore/HK who will benefit. So if we cannot get a trade and services deal, Hammond's own logic means that London will be competing, not with Paris nor Frankfurt but with the New World. What policies would the UK have to adopt to compete with these economies? It isn't regulatory alignment and taxation convergence with the EU is it, better known as only modest changes as described by the Chancellor. I believe that the Chancellor is all too aware of the ridiculous position he holds and is working on the basis of selling out any and all of the current 'red lines' to get some kind of regulatory equivalence in the final deal for the City. The price of this is going to be very high. Taken together, these two themes of delay and contrition will lead to a very bad deal for the UK. It remains to be seen if anyone will stand up for no deal is better than a bad deal.
Name: Not4EU, UK      Date/Time: 07 Mar 2018, 08.31am
Message: Thanks for the Committee meeting video. They're extremely informative for those with busy lives who may not have the time to dig out the multiple & various leaving discussions. It's much appreciated & an excellent service, rarely covered by the remainstream media. I'm sure that you, like me, did a double take at around 17.32 mark as more duplicity by our Govt was uncovered. In answer to a question regarding the 'Brexit' budget allocation, Hammond said that part of that money was for a potential 'no deal' scenario at the end of the 'transition' period. Pardon? The only purpose of an implementation/transition phase is the orderly transfer from one known state to another known state. Apart from the fact that a 'transition' period should not be required for about 90% of powers reverting to us, the transition is being used to delay us leaving & Hammond is inferring that negotiations will continue. Why else would there be a possible 'no deal' at the end of the 'implementation'?

The transition/implementation 'phase' as it currently is is no more than a delaying tactic. We need a leader who will stand up to the bullies from Brussels & say that we are leaving on 29th March 2019, & do this by the end of the month. The wet rag remoaners 'negotiating' our current sell-out need to be replaced by a cross-party selection of solid Brexiteers & businessmen. No 'deal' that they can come up with will better than WTO for delivering what we actually voted for.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 06 Mar 2018, 5.02pm
Message: Sadly, Chancellor Hammond is merely a theatrical clown of the first order. Could anybody be more treacherous and against its citizens - Theresa May perhaps? Hammond is wholly in league with his Brussels cronies; to the disgraceful detriment of the UK!
New PM? Matteo Salvini of La Lega                                    © Salvini Twitter feed
‘It’s never over until the generously-proportioned soprano starts her final aria’ - as a politically correct Italian might say in Milan’s famous opera house, La Scala.
That said, the counting in the Italian elections on Sunday is now virtually complete so we will venture a few notes.
Make no mistake, this was a stunning victory for the forces of freedom and democracy in Europe. The BBC may have felt it didn’t warrant mentioning in their main 6pm news(/entertainment) show yesterday evening, but across the EU the shock waves were spreading out as the full enormity of the results started to settle in.
Right: The magnificent former Italian mezzo-soprano, Fiorenza Cossotto
On Sunday morning as the polls opened in Italy, the self-important little Belgian MEP Guy Verhofstadt tweeted: “If you believe in an open society and you stand against the divisive ideology of nationalism, it's time to make a stand. Let's join together and work for a brighter future. #WeAreEurope #IAmEuropean”
The Italians promptly ignored him completely and voted in their droves for parties opposed to the EU and to Verhofstadt’s federalist dystopia. Below are the latest figures on percentage votes cast and these are almost 100% complete.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Clear winners were Luigi Di Maio’s Five Star Movement (M5S), with the ruling left-wing coalition of the PD falling dramatically and only just claiming second place, slightly ahead of the rising ‘La Lega’ anti-EU party of Matteo Salvini.
As we hinted early yesterday morning, when political parties face the prospect of power, previous promises not to enter coalitions have a habit of being jettisoned. A good example of this has just taken place in Germany, where the socialist SPD was adamant they would not partner again with Angela Merkel’s CDU/CSU in coalition government.
For the last few months they have been in the process of doing exactly what they said they'd never do.
So it was in Italy yesterday, where Luigi di Maio indicated that M5S would be amenable to a coalition with other parties. If they don’t do this, they cannot realistically govern.
We expect the President to call on Di Maio to try to form a government, however Di Maio could only do this if he can partner with the triumphant La Lega, who made significant gains on Sunday. His alternatives would be to form a ‘grand coalition’ with the socialist PD although this would leave them with almost no credibility, or to try speaking to a number of smaller parties in an effort to try to make up the numbers.
As things stand, Matteo Salvini of Lega has said “no, no, no” to the prospect of a coalition with M5S. He has indicated that he could become prime minister with the support of Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party and the ‘Brothers of Italy’ party and another minor party. This is in effect the ‘centre-right coalition’ that we have shown in our charts, although it doesn’t look like they will have enough seats to govern effectively unless they find more minor partners.
Much depends on the final tally of seats today, although we don’t expect the picture to change much. If Salvini stands firm against any overtures from Di Maio's 5 Star Movement, and if he can win another couple of minor parties over to his centre-right coalition without having to compromise much, we could see a really anti-EU party take power. But whether it's Salvini or Di Maio that becomes Italy's new PM, life will be very interesting indeed.
As well as the earthquake in Italian domestic politics, the results will have an impact in the EU in three ways.
Firstly, it will take time for a new government to be formed. In fact this has been an element of EU comment from Brussels and from some EU capitals such as Paris and Berlin. They express a desire for ‘stability’ and a government that can be ‘constructive’ (by which they mean pro-EU).
Just as Germany will finally get itself a government, almost six months after its people voted, another of the EU’s major members is entering an interim phase. In the time it will take Italian parties to form a government, big decisions – for example about Brexit – will be more difficult to achieve.
The second effect on the EU will take place in the EU parliament and in the corridors of Brussels. Interestingly, the four leading parties in the election results yesterday are members of four different groupings in the EU parliament. Here they are:
  • Five Star Movement – “Europe of Freedom and Direct Democracy” (EFDD), with UKIP
  • PD – “Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats” (S&D), with UK Labour party
  • La Lega – “Europe for Nations and Freedom” (ENF), with VPs of Janice Atkinson, Marie Le Pen
  • Forza Italia – “European People's Party” (EPP) with Juncker, Barnier, Merkel
Clearly no seats will change in the EU Parliament as this was a domestic general election, but there will undoubtedly be a different feeling amongst MEPs. In particular the EFDD and ENF groupings will be riding high after the strong performances of M5S and Lega respectively.
Yesterday we were able to grab a comment from Janice Atkinson MEP, who is Vice-President of the Europe for Nations and Freedom (ENF) group. Within that group is Matteo Salvini’s La Lega and there is every prospect that Signor Salvini will be the next Italian Prime Minister. Here is what Ms Atkinson told us:
“Salvini is the future. The FPO of Austria is the future. Our group, the ENF, is the future. The voters of the EU are rejecting the old parties of the EU elite. The future is bright, it’s populism.”
Right: Vice-President of Europe for Nations and Freedom group, EU parliament
Janice Atkinson
In election after election, the pro-EU parties across Europe have been losing ground at the expense of eurosceptic, ‘populist’ parties.
Initially the EU tried to gloss over this. The rise of Geert Wilders in the Netherlands was recreated as a victory over populism for Mark Rutte. Marie Le Pen’s amazing result in winning votes from a third of the French population was brushed aside in a wave of Macronyism. Austria’s anti-EU anti-immigration FPO making it into coalition government was a little hard to stomach for some in Brussels, but they managed to maintain their composure.
Now we have Italy, and a stunning defeat for EU-ism. The simple fact is that there is a growing tide of populist and eurosceptic sentiment amongst the peoples of the EU, no matter what the EU’s surveys say. Brussels is forever producing surveys which show how wonderful everyone thinks the EU is.
Unfortunately for them, real votes by real people in real democratic elections have told a different story.
Did you watch the main 6 o’clock new bulletins on BBC1 or on Sky News yesterday?
If you had, you would have discovered that the most important news for the BBC was about a cyclist who may have taken asthma medicine whilst knowing it would help his performance. That got 10 minutes.
Regrettably, neither the BBC nor Sky felt that the bombshell news from what will soon be the EU’s 3rd largest economy simply wasn’t newsworthy enough to make it into their 30 minute news programmes. Neither news organisation put Italy into its main news slot.
Can you imagine how the news editors in each case might have reacted if a pro-EU party had won the elections in Italy? Hold the front page!
Below is a tweet from Nick Robinson of the BBC. For 10 years he was the BBC’s political editor, before becoming one of the top presenters of the flagship Today programme on Radio 4.
Mr Robinson is a major figure at the BBC. Now, it’s one thing to have a little jest occasionally, but when the Corporation’s output is so clearly biased against Brexit and for all things EU, we think it would be wise for them to take things like the Italian election results very seriously indeed if they don’t want to be accused of even more bias.
Incidentally, here’s what we replied yesterday:
All the comments in the pro-EU press and amongst the EU elites conveniently ignore the fact that the pro-EU winners in the Netherlands took over 7 months after their election last year to form a government. They also ignore the fact that it’s almost 6 months since the Germans voted and we still don’t have a formed German government.
The key message from those in Brussels and from the pro-EU media across the continent (and in the UK) is that the result is a ‘hung parliament’, and that everyone hopes stability will soon be restored.
Where the incredible results for the eurosceptic parties were headlined, naturally this was done in disparaging ways.
                                    © New York Times
We have run several pieces about Italy in the last year precisely because we saw it heading for a sea-change and because this could in the future be seen as one of the pivot points for the EU’s federalist dreams. We have tried to give you some perspective on the issues which helped to define this 2018 election, especially on the economy, unemployment, and immigration.
There are still vast swathes of the British population which believe in some kind of Eutopian ideal, because that’s the line that has been spun for decades by key sections of the media – in particular the broadcast media.
The fact is that in many parts of the EU this tale is pure fiction. Sometimes we really wish all the British MPs who voted Remain in 2016 could be forced to spend a month in Brussels and in EU member states.
Then they could see the resentment in places that have suffered from sudden immigration as the societal fabric is collapsing. They could see the lost generation of young people who have no prospect of jobs. And they could see how British taxpayers’ money has been used as ‘EU money’ to fund the most absurd and wasteful projects, subsidising the development of the majority of EU member states at the expense of the UK.
And possibly most importantly, they could see at first hand the sick joke that passes for democracy in the EU.
For what happened in Italy on Sunday we have a message.
[ Sources: Ministero dell'Interno ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.55am, 06 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Carole, Merseyside      Date/Time: 06 Mar 2018, 09.38am
Message: All EU-run media led with a "hung parliament". You could literally pick out which websites never to visit again. Italy have suffered greatly and I wish them the best of luck in reclaiming back their country.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Our investigation into the terrible situation in South Africa and how the EU is standing idly by, despite all its agreements and pacts, is reaching its conclusion.
Yesterday we concluded our interviews with important people in South Africa and overnight we have received some exclusive data which will shock you.
Whether you are living in the EU, in South Africa, or in other countries like the USA or Australia, you do NOT want to miss our final articles in this series.
P.S. If there is any way you could help to fund this series we would be exceptionally grateful. We felt compelled to start this investigation even though we knew how much resource it would consume.
       07.50am, 06 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Below are the latest results we're monitoring from the Italian Ministero dell'Interno.
Please see the article below for our overnight analysis.
[ Sources: Ministero dell'Interno ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       09.00am, 05 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
  • Biggest single party
  • Biggest coalition group
  • Pro-EU parties fall
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Based on the exit poll conducted by Italy’s main RAI television network this night, the Eurosceptics have done even better than most forecasters predicted. The ruling socialist ‘Democratic Party’ (PD) of former Prime Minister Matteo Renzi will gain only 19% of the vote, if the exit polls are right. This is a similar humiliation to that suffered by Martin Schulz’s SPD socialist party in the German elections last September.
Conversely the Eurosceptic stars are in the ascendant.
  • Italians give 5-star review to 31 year-old Luigi Di Maio’s 5-Star Movement
  • Right-wing La Lega led by Matteo Salvini scores ahead of Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza
  • Ruling socialist PD party led by former PM Renzi is trounced
  • Eurosceptics storm the election
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
All over Italy and further afield in Europe, the ‘populists’ were celebrating through the night. For some this took the form of openly mocking the EU elites in Brussels and elsewhere. Others were content merely to offer their congratulations.
"The European Union is going to have a bad night," tweeted Marine Le Pen, leader of France's right-wing Front National.
For the EU, the message seemed to be that “no-one won”. Certainly that was the message coming out of pro-EU magazines like Politico:
We anticipate this will be the overall theme when EU elites start to comment after the actual results are announced.
If the exit polls are to be believed, La Lega will defeat Forza Italia – just. This is significant because these are the two main parties in the centre-right coalition, along with the smaller Fratelli – ‘the Brothers of Italy’.
If the Lega does indeed gain more votes than Forza then its leader, Matteo Salvini, will claim the right to be the Prime Minister. This could happen if this is the coalition called on by the Italian president to try to form a government. Forza is led by 3 times former PM Silvio Berlusconi, but its Prime Ministerial candidate is the EU Parliament’s president, Antonio Tajani, as we reported yesterday.
In yesterday’s report we called it for Salvini’s Lega, you may recall. Whilst the Five Star Movement MS5 was always going to gain the most votes, it refuses to go into coalition with anyone so it would be almost certain to be unable to form a government.
Of course, this is the world of politics, no matter how much MS5 say they’re not an establishment party. Looking at ther exit poll results, it even looks possible that they could form a government if they team up with just one other party – La Lega.
Now that really would face the EU elites with a bowl of cold spaghetti.
[ Sources: RAI TV Italia | Ministero dell'Interno ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.30am, 05 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
                                    © EEAS
(To see all parts of our Special Report, click here)
The EU has a diplomatic service. It's called the European External Action Service. Within this is the Delegation of the European Union to South Africa based in Pretoria. If the EU were a country, this would be the embassy.
We took a look at the "EUinSA" Twitter account, because the EU loves to promote itself continually on social media. Sure enough, the EU's diplomatic mission has been busy.... on LGBT rights and on hate speech.
EU's diplomatic mission in SA                                         © Twitter
EU's diplomatic mission in SA                                         © Twitter
Since Friday when we launched this series of special reports on the EU and South Africa, emphasising the crisis in SA and the EU's lack of interest, we have received a lot of messages.
To those of you supporting our efforts to try to bring this to the attention of lawmakers in Brussels, London and Washington, thank you.
However some of you have expressed doubts about whether our reports were correct.
You found it hard to believe that the EU has had no interest in what's been going on in SA, and especially that they have said nothing about latest extraordinary legislative moves in the SA Parliament from the EFF and ANC to expropriate property and assets without compensation. Many of you have also found it hard to believe that the EU hasn't expressed outrage over what appears to be a coordinated campaign of murders of a section of the South African community.
Above we have offered some simple proof. We could have produced links to all the EU sites we monitor, where nothing is being said, but as usual we found a very graphic way of showing you.
There's nothing about the events in Parliament on Tuesday when the ANC governing party backed an EFF extremist measure to expropriate property and assets.
Nothing about the continuing campaign of violence directed towards rural farms, where farmers fear for their lives nightly.
Just the usual stuff about LGBTI rights and what the EU is doing about alleged hate speech - or speech it doesn't like.
We will continue with our articles in this series. The next two pieces involve interviews with people who know what's really happening in South Africa. Do please contribute something to support our work if you can.
[ Sources: EU Commission | EU Council | EEAS | EU Parliament | ECHO | Twitter ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       07.45am, 04 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 06 Mar 2018, 05.17am
Message: The series of articles showing EU involvement in Africa raises fundamental issues. The EU commission have I consider gone way above their 'remit'. What was originally a trading arrangement between a handful of like-minded countries with similar economies and culture, has become wholly political in the extreme, and enlarged out of all proportion without seeking consent from peoples affected. The European Union is not a country, but that is exactly how it's behaving. So out of hand it is, the commission demands it has an 'EU army'. One must therefore question why a commission of a non-country is 'forcing' its members to form this EU army, with its wealthier members paying most of the bill. The answer in my view is relatively straightforward. The EU commission continue to move in one direction only to create their superstate, even if they deny this? National parliaments and cultures will cease to exist over time. To deny their [obvious] ambitions, would mean they don't require an 'EU army'? When we exit the EU, we can help African nations to help themselves. We can remove some tariffs to that end, but we don't need to keep throwing £billions at it. We certainly did not give our consent for the EU commission to use UK money like water. It appears there remains a lack of transparency with EU matters, yet EU commissioner's continue to enjoy taxpayer funded luxury?
                                                   © Marina Militare
If you are reading this in the UK after 6am this Sunday morning, the more politically-enthusiastic of your Italian conterparts will have already cast their votes in the Italian general election taking place today.
We say ‘votes’ because each Italian person aged 25 or over has two votes. One is for the Chamber of Deputies and the other is for the Senate. Italians aged 18-24 only get to vote for the Chamber of Deputies.
This latter fact might surprise certain elements of the British political scene who seem to think that 12-year olds in Britain should be given the vote.
In each case, each vote is split roughly 37:63 between a first-past-the-post (FPTP) system and a proportional representation (PR) system based on party lists.
Confused? Wait until the results. Only then will we really know just how confused the Italian political landscape has become. Thanks to major electoral changes which were agreed last year, no-one is at all certain how it will look in Italy tomorrow morning.
There is however one absolute certainty. The EU elites will be defeated by the eurosceptics. Brussels can try to spin it all it wants, euroscepticism will be the winner.
The spinning has already started. Some of the major players have toned down their anti-EU rhetoric in the last few weeks and this has been presented in Brussels as “See, they all believe in the EU really, that was just populist rubbish to get more votes”.
In fact, based on watching and reading the main players for a long time, we would say the anti-EU rhetoric was and is genuine and they’ve only toned it down somewhat in order to persuade more Italians who might be nervous of pulling out of the Euro or EU. Just as in the EU Referendum in the UK, the Italian Establishment has employed Project Fear tactics to scare Italians into voting for the status quo.
Under Italian law, opinion polling stopped a couple of weeks ago. This makes today’s vote even more exciting.
As former British PM Harold Wilson once noted, a week is a long time in politics. For example, it was only on Thursday evening that the EU Parliament President Antonio Tajani announced that he will be the Prime Ministerial candidate for Silvio Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party if it wins the most votes.
                                                   © Twitter
Yes, you read that right. President Tajani of the EU Parliament announced at the last minute that he will become Italian PM if Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party wins the most votes in its coalition. As it’s virtually compulsory for Presidents of the EU Parliament to be anti-British, we sincerely hope Forza Italia wins fewer than the Lega.
On several occasions in the last few years we’ve explained the breakdown of Italian politics. Or at least we did so to the best of our ability, as this is always something of a challenge. Second to football, politics sometimes seems like the national sport in Italy.
  • There are dozens of Italian parties
  • The main ones have made semi-formal coalitions
  • The anti-establishment 5 Star Movement is most popular but won’t enter a coalition
Below we show the latest polling for the six most popular parties. This was the last available poll which took place in the days leading up to 16 February.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Below is how the parties pool together when in their coalitions. Broadly (coalitions have been changing frequently over the last 12 weeks) there is a majority for what can be called Eurosceptic parties.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
The 5 Star Movement looks likely to receive the highest number of votes cast. However it will not be enough to form a government and M5S has said it won’t form a coalition.
This leaves the run-off between Berlusconi’s Forza Italia and Matteo Salvini’s Lega, formerly ‘Lega Nord’. They are both part of a centre-right coalition with the Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) who are rather confusingly led by a blonde woman.
In theory, whichever one between Forza Italia and Lega wins the most votes is likely to be the one producing the next Prime Minister of Italy.
If it’s Berlusconi’s Forza, that means EU Parliament President Tajani. If it’s La Lega then it’s Matteo Salvini.
At this point you may be asking why we call Berlusconi’s Forza Italia party Euroscpetic, when it might soon be headed by the Eurofanatic President of the EU Parliament, Antonio Tajani.
Good question. You might also wonder why Angela Merkel appears to have lent her support to Berlusconi too.
A flippant answer would be that this is typical European politics. However, given the absurdities in British politics since David Cameron resigned, we should really include the UK in that characterisation. Where once there was comparative normality and stability in the UK, most of the latest batch of British politicians seem like children to us.
A more serious answer to the question is that we’ve based our definitions on the accepted views of most observers in recent years and on the statements of the relevant key politicians in the last 12 months.
Naturally this is almost impossible to answer, but as we’re not politicians we’ll give it a go. We think Matteo Salvini of the Lega would be best for Italy and for Brexit.
It’s perfectly possible that if we were Italian we would think differently, so we ask our Italian readers please to indulge us. Nevertheless we’re going to call it for Signor Salvini.
Matteo Salvini, Candidate for PM, the Lega                                     © The Lega
We hope that the above was interesting without overwhelming you with Italian political facts you don't really need to know.
In the article below we're going to summarise some basic facts affecting the election - the economy, migrant crisis etc.
[ Sources: Italian Ministry of the Interior | Termometro Politico ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       05.55am, 04 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 04 Mar 2018, 09.57am
Message: Beware betraying the Italian people, there is a history of punishing errant elite politicians,they end up dead, suspended by their ankles from lampposts. If the people vote for change, and an end to the unlimited third world immigration,with its associated benefits of drug dealing, robbery,rapes and murders and don't get it. Beware the backlash.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Italians go to the polls today in what may to prove be the biggest electoral setback to the EU elites thus far.
Here, we take a quick re-look at some of the information we've been providing in recent months, to remind you of some of the issues at stake.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
As you can see above, recently it has been Italy that has been bearing the brunt of the continuing EU migrant crisis. More than half (58%) of ‘irregular migrants’ entering the EU last year entered through Italy, and a great many are still there.
If you read some EU documents you could be forgiven for thinking the migrant crisis is over. We have seen many where it is referred to in the past tense. The crisis continues, as any Italian will tell you.
It is a simple fact that Mrs Merkel did not spend €6 billion of EU taxpayers’ money stopping the flow of migrants into Italy.
Instead she did a deal with Turkey’s President Erdogan and since April 2016 the EU has been giving that money to Turkey to prevent the flow of migrants into Greece and thereby stemming the flow into Germany.
This has led to the strong feeling in Italy that it has been hung out to dry by the EU, or at the very least that it has been sidelined and ignored. By September 2016 things were so bad that the then Italian Prime Minister, Matteo Renzi, refused even to share a stage with the German Chancellor and the French President at the end of the EU Summit.
Alarmed at this turn of events, the EU Commission started to look at measures it could take to settle the Italians down. More money was found, although it seems improbable that this was anywhere near enough. Still, it allowed the EU to say it was doing something.
The table below shows some of the funding given from the EU budget to Italy as the migrant crisis developed. It amounts to more than €0.75 billon euros but this is for a 7 year period. It’s worth bearing in mind, however, that the EU pays for its migrant crisis out of many different funds which do not have ‘migrant’ in the title, so this figure is far less than reality.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Unlike Greece which saw a dramatic drop in numbers following Mrs Merkel’s €6bn bribe of EU taxpayers’ money being given to Turkey, the number of migrants entering Italy remained at a fairly consistent level since 2014 when the flows first became really significant.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Then in the second half of 2017 Italy experienced a drop as a result of migrants being unable to leave Libya. This gave a total of 119,400 for Italy, for last year as a whole.
Despite the fact that numbers fell in the second half of 2017, the EU’s Frontex border agency nevertheless noted that “the Central Mediterranean route (to Italy) still recorded by far the largest number of irregular migrants.” In other words, numbers dropped, but Italy still got more than anyone else.
The majority of the illegal migrants entering Italy are from Africa, with Nigerians being the most numerous.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Single men are the largest grouping, with the exact proportion varying according to nationality. The highest percentages of men in 2017 were amongst the Sudanese (90%), Tunisian (89%) and Senegalese (86%) migrants. For all nationalities single adult men outnumbered women and children and they constituted an average of 74.5% of the total.
In November last year, an IPSOS-MORI poll found that
almost half (49%) of Italians agreed with the statement:
“These days I feel like a stranger in my country.”
Three weeks ago Mr Matteo Salvini of the Lega said: “The only antidote to racism is to control, regulate and limit immigration. There are millions of Italians in economic difficulty. Italians are not racist, but out-of-control immigration brings with it far from positive reactions. We want to prevent that.” He pledged to deport 500,000 illegal immigrants.
Before anyone condemns Signor Salvini for being a 'far-right fascist extremist populist bigot', they might want to look at what the President of the EU Parliament and prospective Italian PM said:
“Europe should repatriate all illegal immigrants and block new arrivals.”
“We must prevent people from arriving at our borders by securing international deals with the nations the migrants come from.... we must return illegal immigrants to their countries.”
- Antonio Tajani, President of EU Parliament and candidate for Italian PM
In order to adopt the Euro as its currency, EU countries have to meet specific economic conditions designed to ensure economic convergence with the countries of the Euro area.
One of the indicators that has been worrying many people for many years is the stubborn refusal of government debt to reduce. One of the ways the EU measures the soundness and sustainability of public finances of a member state is by the level of government borrowing.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
In order to join the Euro, the limit on government debt as a percentage of GDP is technically 60%. Today, according to the Banca d’Italia, the Italian government’s debt stands at 133% - more than double the limit.
In effect, the Eurozone’s 3rd largest economy would not even pass
the eligibility test to join the Euro, if it applied today.
Last year the credit ratings agency Fitch downgraded Italy's sovereign debt from BBB+ to BBB, which is just one level above junk status. Here is what they had to say at the time:-
“Italy's persistent track record of fiscal slippage, back-loading of consolidation, weak economic growth, and resulting failure to bring down the very high level of general government debt has left it more exposed to potential adverse shocks. This is compounded by an increase in political risk, and ongoing weakness in the banking sector which has required planned public intervention in three banks since December.”
Whilst credit ratings agencies generally have been criticised in recent years for many reasons surrounding accuracy, their verdict on Italy is very poor indeed.
As you can see from our graph below, Italy’s economy is still trying to catch up from the hit it took in the crisis of 2008. GDP remains below the level it achieved 10 years ago.
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
It is sadly the case that unemployment has persisted in Italy since the start of this century. Currently the overall unemployment rate in Italy stands at 11.2% (UK: 4.2%) , with youth unemployment at a very unhealthy 35.2% (UK: 12.0%).
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
Catastrophically high youth unemployment rates have plagued the EU for years. It is easy to become blasé about it. It is, however, an obscene stain on the face of the EU. In southern Europe there is a generation which has been affected irrevocably.
Italy is one of the countries in the EU which favours home ownership, like the UK. ISTAT (the Italian version of the UK’s Office for National Statistics) reports that over 80% of the country's total households are now owner-occupiers.
Unfortunately for a great many Italians, their housing market has been decimated over many years. In real terms house prices have fallen by almost 25% since 2008, according to the ECB and reports produced for the Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze.
Above are just a few facts to give an idea of the issues which are confronting Italians as they cast their vote today. We adore Italy and love the Italians, like many British people.
Whatever the outcome today, we wish the very best to Italy in the days, weeks and years ahead.
[ Sources: Frontex | EASO | International Organisation for Migration (UN) | EU Commission | Italian Ministry of the Interior | Marina Militare | ISTAT | Banca d'Italia | Agenzia Entrate | European Central Bank | Fitch Ratings | Ministero dell'Economia e delle Finanze | ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       05.55am, 04 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
SA Parliament dances for new President                                    © SA Parliament
(To see all parts of our Special Report, click here)
This article aims to show up the EU’s foreign policy agenda and the EU’s hypocrisy in failing to counsel and warn South Africa before it becomes an international pariah state.
  • EU has many foreign policies which never seem to be known about by the British people
  • It has a “Joint Africa-EU Strategy” with South Africa
  • It also has a Multi-annual Indicative Programme (MIP) 2014-2020
  • The EU also has a Development Cooperation Instrument (DCI), almost €¼ billion of funding
  • It had a big EU-African summit as recently as November last year
  • It has agreements with SA covering good governance and social cohesion
  • Yet it has failed to say one word about the genocide or state theft of property
If you’re short of time, jump to the ‘Observations’ in the pale pink box at the end. Do please come back to the main body of this article though – it contains some very interesting stuff!
Firstly, a very quick bit of history. The first post-apartheid general election was held in South Africa on 27 April 1994, with Nelson Mandela becoming President on 10 May of that year.
The African National Congress (ANC) party won 62.65% of the vote. A ‘Government of National Unity’ was established, with a cabinet made up of 12 ANC representatives, 6 from the National Party, and 3 from the Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP).
In the past 24 years a lot has changed. In Part 3 above we described the EU’s ‘Economic Partnership Agreement’ which was signed in 2016. This is just part of a complex web of other agreements which the EU has signed with South Africa. This article describes a few of the main ones in the last 10 years or so.
[NOTE: We have documented a great deal more information on this. What follows is our summary which we have kept as short as possible.]
In 2006 the EU and South Africa signed a “Joint Africa-EU Strategy”
The Joint EU-Africa strategy has four ‘objectives’. The second of these is as follows:
“To strengthen and promote peace, security, democratic governance and human rights, fundamental freedoms, gender equality, sustainable economic development, including industrialisation, and regional and continental integration in Africa, and to ensure that all the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) are met in all African countries by the year of 2015.”
- Joint EU-Africa Strategy, 28 April 2006, 9th draft
We have highlighted the second objective because it makes clear what the EU constantly tries to do. Any agreement of any kind that the EU makes with countries always seems to include many social or political elements. We comment on this further in ‘Observations’ below.
By 2014 there was a new EU Commission headed by Jean-Claude Juncker and the EU was still trying to move things forward with African countries. At the fourth EU-Africa Summit held on 2-3 April 2014 in Brussels, the EU produced one of its famous ‘roadmaps’.
In it, the priorities were re-set as follows:
  1. Peace and Security
  2. Democracy, Good Governance and Human Rights
  3. Human development
  4. Sustainable and inclusive development and growth and continental integration
  5. Global and emerging issues
This was agreed in 2015. During 2014-2020, EU Cooperation with South Africa was set to focus on 3 main sectors, namely:
  1. Employment creation (joblessness is at 37% - much more for young people)
  2. Education, training and innovation
  3. Building a capable and developmental state
You may wish to reflect on how these priorities sound like those of a government, not a friendly trading organisation keen to expand its business.
€241 million was allocated from the EU budget to South Africa as part of this programme. This is in addition to the much larger monies donated individually by EU member states such as the UK, which of course were not part of EU contributions and which the EU should not take credit for.
EU leaders with the African Union in Ivory Coast, Nov 2017                                    © African Union
By May last year the EU’s de facto Foreign Secretary, the Italian ex-Communist Federica Mogherini, and the Commission issued a joint communication for “a renewed impetus of the Africa-EU Partnership”. The Foreign Affairs Council welcomed the joint communication at its meeting on 15 May 2017.
Then, late last year the 5th African Union - European Union (AU-EU) Summit took place on 29-30 November 2017 in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire. You will note that as with so much else connected with the EU’s African adventures, this summit took place in a former French colony. The theme of this Summit was “Investing in Youth for Accelerated Inclusive Growth and Sustainable Development”.
Here was the EU Council President’s take on the Summit:
"As you know, the European Union is Africa’s biggest partner and closest neighbour. Its biggest investor, its biggest trading partner, its biggest provider of development aid and humanitarian assistance as well as its biggest contributor in peace and security. And this summit demonstrated our determination to reinforce our partnership even more."
- President Tusk at the press conference of the AU-EU summit, 30 November 2017
No EU Summit is ever complete without a worthy ‘declaration’ at the end, and this summit was no exception. We don’t usually bore readers with the nature of proclamations which the EU favours but for once we will, to make a point. Here is just a small excerpt from the Declaration of the EU-Africa Summit in November:-
“We emphasize our common interest and opportunity for a paradigm shift to an even stronger, mutually beneficial partnership in the spirit of shared ownership, responsibility, reciprocity, respect and mutual accountability and transparency. As two Unions, we support regional unity, integration and speaking with One Voice in the management and implementation of this partnership, in which the regional Economic Communities have their place. We commit to stronger mutual engagement and a more coordinated approach to ensure effective multilateralism, including through stronger AU-EU cooperation at the UN and other international institutions. We will also strengthen AU-EU-UN trilateral cooperation;”
No, we haven’t got a clue either.
This document runs to 13 pages, and buried in all the jargon is a section on ‘Governance’. This is highly relevant to South Africa and its direction of travel.
Here is an excerpt:
“We are committed to mutually respectful, constructive and equal political dialogue on equal footing aimed at enhancing democracy, good governance and human rights in line with the provisions of the UN Charter, the African Union Constitutive Act and related AU Governance frameworks and the EU Lisbon Treaty;”
And here’s something about corruption:
“We commit to joining efforts to combat corruption in the private and public sectors in our two continents, and promote international cooperation in line with the current internationally agreed standards to combat illicit financial flows and tax avoidance and evasion, and strengthen asset recovery, in order to foster sustainable development, particularly in light of the declaration by the Assembly of the African Union of 2018 as the year of “Winning the Fight Against Corruption: A Sustainable Path for Africa’s Transformation;”
There is then a long section about investment and development. This last part is particularly relevant given the billions that the EU is giving to Africa. Here is an excerpt:
“We commit to promoting responsible and sustainable public and private capital, and to that effect we welcome the launch of the European External Investment Plan, as an integral financing mechanism to crowd in investments from financial institutions and the private sector, which will complement other similar de-risking instruments. This will focus on value-adding, human investment and skills sectors with the highest potential for sustainable job creation and low-emissions climate resilient and sustainable development, such as agriculture, agro-business, manufacturing, the ocean economy, the circular economy, sustainable energy and digitalization, thereby assisting African countries to implement their Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) to the Paris Agreement;”
Overall, the number of commitments in this area are worrying. The document ends as follows:-
“We commit to promote good governance in global Institutions to make them more accountable, representative, balanced, effective, inclusive, participatory and transparent; we undertake to promote the dialogue of civilizations and tolerance as ingredients for global peace.”
We feel compelled to point out something so obvious that it’s easy to miss it.
The last time we looked, there wasn’t a country called ‘Africa’ and neither was there a country called ‘the European Union’. And yet the EU Council President talks as though this is the case and says “the European Union is Africa’s biggest partner and closest neighbour”.
EU leaders being entertained, Cote d'Ivoire, Nov 2017                                    © African Union
This is all part of the subconscious reshaping of people’s understanding of the world in which they live. African countries vary wildly in every respect, as do countries which are members of the EU. It simply isn’t appropriate to lump them all together like this unless you are of the globalist ‘no borders’ persuasion.
For years we've been analysing the EU's work. Recently, trade has become a big topic in Brussels. This happened as a result of the EU Referendum in the UK. Suddenly the EU's performance as a trade negotiator was under the spotlight.
People like us pointed out that the EU was singularly bad at the one thing which had supposedly justified this club in the first place - grouping together to trade together and to negotiate better trade deals globally.
Suddenly in 2016 you couldn't move in Brussels for trade deals being announced or discussed. In 2015 there were just 5 Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) listed on the EU Commission's website. By 2016, 'economic partnership' deals like the one with South Africa were re-classified as FTAs. Now Remoaner MPs in the UK glibly talk of the UK losing out on the "60 or so" free trade agreements that the EU has negotiated for us. Most of these were simply re-classifications of various 'cooperation' deals. If you asked these MPs, they wouldn't be able to describe what a single one covered, nor what benefit it brings to the UK.
In reality, the EU does social engineering deals, with trade tacked on. Trade is not something many Commissioners have any knowledge of. Regrettably, that even includes the Trade Commissioner herself, Ms Malmstrom. Where they are far more comfortable is in vague concepts of a political or social engineering nature. Look above at the 'priorities' and 'objectives' set out by the EU to South Africa in its agreements. The emphasis is all on society, employment, climate, sustainability, 'yuman' rights, gender issues, etc.
South Africa is in trouble. A mass insanity has been allowed to spread amongst a small proportion of the populace, without an effective opposing argument. This seems to have scared the ruling ANC into adopting the Marxist-Leninist policies and practices of the red-jumpsuited pseudo-military EFF.
With the steady but systematic murder of a minority section of the population, and the imminent expropriation of land and assets, what is the EU saying?
Given the fact that the EU packs its agreements with politico-social objectives and requirements, you would think they would jump at the chance to exert some influence via the agreements they've signed with South Africa over the last 20 years. It appears not.
We find this to be a complete disgrace and hope you do too. We've published this series of articles because it was right to do so, and because it exposes the hypocritical EU with all its unpleasant airs and graces.
We maintain our view that if the British television media had done its job over the last 20 years, and had shown the EU the way it really is, a Referendum would have been held much earlier and the Leave vote would have been huge.
The story of what has been happening in South Africa has been hidden from the world. We hope our series of articles will help to throw a bright Brexit light onto what is becoming a shameful period in that country's history. The ANC, the EFF and others must be called out. Intense pressure must be brought to be bear to persuade the ANC government to pull back from the disastrous direction it is taking.
MORE: We have more important articles for you which will be coming here soon. In particular we will cover the appalling violence, sexual attacks, and murders which are being committed against a mostly white community in rural areas. Please come back. And if there's any way you could help us with a small (or large!) donation we would be very grateful. Journalism like ours takes time, and we need your support to keep going.
[ Sources: Janice Atkinson | Katie Hopkins | Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA) | Dr Johan Burger, ISS | Lauren Southern | EU Commission | EU Council | EEAS | EU Parliament | ECHO | ANC | EFF | FFP ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       3.40pm, 03 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
SA Parliament dances for new President                                    © SA Parliament
(To see all parts of our Special Report, click here)
South Africa is the EU's largest trading partner in Africa. A member of the African Caribbean Pacific group of countries, South Africa has been the strongest of sub-Saharan Africa's economies.
To look at trade between the EU and South Africa, we need to take you back a couple of years.
On 10th June 2016, there were less than two weeks to go before the date of the biggest referendum in the history of the United Kingdom.
In the corridors of EU power in Brussels, the mood was relaxed. No-one seriously thought that the British people would see through the overwhelming brainwashing that had been conducted by the UK government, the Remain campaign, the Establishment in the UK, the Establishments of all developed countries, and all the international ‘expert’ bodies such as the IMF and OECD.
It was going to be closer than anyone in Brussels wanted, but it would be a Remain vote. Even if most British people had profound doubts about the EU, the majority would never vote for the economic Armageddon they’d been threatened with. Life after 23rd June 2016 would carry on as normal. So, on Friday 10th June 2016 the EU elites in Brussels were in a good mood.
On that June day in Kasane, Botswana, the EU’s Commissioner for Trade, Cecilia Malmström, sat down and signed an Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) with six countries of the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
Cecilia Malmstrom, EU Trade Commissioner                                    © SABC
This Economic Partnership Agreement was signed with South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Mozambique, Namibia, and Swaziland – the so-called ‘SADC EPA group’. This agreement got no coverage in the UK.
To get a clue as to how big this ‘economic partnership’ deal was, we went to the speech of the EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmstrom – a woman who was appointed by Jean-Claude Juncker to the trade job, with no trade experience. No, she really doesn’t have any: Take a look at her CV here.
Ms Malmstrom opened her speech in Botswana by saying:
“As the name suggests, this deal is about making clear that our relationship is a partnership of equals.”
- Cecilia Malmstrom, EU Trade Commissioner - Botswana, 10 June 2016
Oh dear. When she said this, everyone present in Kasane Botswana knew it was nonsense, so why say it?
Fact: EU GDP $17,112 billion: Combined GDP of the SADC EPA Group countries: $392.4 billion
© Facts4EU.Org 2018
This was never, ever, about “a partnership of equals.”
To try to give you some idea of how ridiculous this statement was, we originally tried putting the EU28's GDP into the above chart, instead of the UK's. At $17,112.9 billion dollars last year, the EU28's line on the chart was so huge that South Africa's line was tiny and all the other countries disappeared completely.
The combined GDP of the EU28 is 44 times that of the combined GDP of the SADC EPA Group.
In fact, this deal was not even what the EU said it was at the time, because it failed to include Mozambique as advertised. This is normal for EU trade announcements. They are trumpeted loudly and often. Frequently the same deal is announced more than once during the years that they take to come into force. Each time it sounds like the EU has just done something special.
This deal with South Africa and neighbouring countries was no different. It was announced in 2016, but in fact one of the six countries, Mozambique, has only just finally agreed to it, on 05 February this year. That's 3 weeks ago.
One thing the EU has always been good at is promoting itself - even when the claims it makes seldom stand up to close scrutiny.
  • €21 billion development aid was provided to Africa in 2016 by the EU and its member states, the largest aid donors on the continent
  • €32 billion were invested in Africa by EU companies in 2015, accounting for around one third of the overall foreign direct investment in Africa
  • €3.35 billion are allocated to the European fund for sustainable development, which should trigger up to €44 billion of investments
  • 7 civilian and military missions are deployed across Africa
  • €1.4 billion are committed to educational programmes in Africa from 2014 to 2020
In order for a country to prosper it must - amongst other things - have a stable political environment and operate under a legal framework where investors feel that their money is protected under law.
Sadly the situation in South Africa has deteriorated to such an extent that state expropriation - theft - of assets and property is now being planned. Even more regrettably, we can find no evidence of the EU encouraging or exhorting the South African government to uphold international norms. With the EU28 countries combined being South Africa's largest market, the EU could have used its influence. It has not done so.
South Africa has immense potential as an important economy, with its huge natural wealth. Unfortunately no-one is going to invest in the country if the government itself fails to respect property and asset ownership. It's now essential for both the EU and for the UK government to use all the leverage at their disposal to prevent the imminent catastrophe from occurring.
Even if the EU won't take up the cause of natural justice for the citizens whose property and assets are going to be stolen, surely the EU must represent the interests of the thousands of EU companies who have invested in South Africa?
In Part 4 of this series we will look at how the EU has embedded itself in South Africa, signing what are effectively political treaties. Given what is now going on in South Africa, the EU should start to re-think these very quickly indeed.
We will also uncover some of the most worrying aspects of the EU's foreign relationships. We show how what should be simple trade arrangements are dominated by what are in effect political treaties.
Given that the EU's relationship with South Africa is so political, we then question why the EU has failed to say a single word about the atrocities and the unacceptable and unconstitutional behaviour now taking place there. There has not been any concern that another mass migration crisis may be on the verge of happening. With citizens under attack physically and under threat of having their property seized, the EU will need to think about asylum measures. If it is not already doing so, the Dutch government also needs to step up to the plate.
We think you will find the next article interesting. As ever, please consider supporting us financially if you can.
[ Sources: Janice Atkinson | Katie Hopkins | Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA) | Dr Johan Burger, ISS | Lauren Southern | EU Commission | EU Council | EEAS | EU Parliament | ECHO | ANC | EFF | FFP ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       10.20am, 03 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Cyril Ramaphosa becomes President                                    © SA Parliament
1. South Africa to take its people’s property without compensation
2. Violence and murder against white minority goes unchecked
3. EU continues to back this communist regime with UK taxpayers' money
And the EU's (ex-Communist) head of foreign policy says nothing
(To see all parts of our Special Report, click here)
On Tuesday in the South African Parliament, MPs voted to take the South African people’s property without compensation.
This is on top of years of a gradual descent into the systematic terrorism of white farmers which has recently reached grotesque proportions, with brutal murders every week.
Since its new beginnings in the post-Apartheid world of 1994, South Africa has slowly become a dysfunctional, undemocratic, violent and corrupt society from top to bottom, as we shall show.
  • The EU still supports it,
  • It won't debate it
  • And it continues to spend your money on it
While innocent men, women and children are being murdered and raped, the EU celebrates its ‘economic partnership’ with South Africa and attends EU-African summits to great fanfare, but has absolutely nothing to say about the atrocities.
Janice Atkinson, British MEP and Vice-President of the Europe for Nations and Freedom group of the EU Parliament, spoke exclusively to Brexit Facts4EU.Org. We will cover more of this interview later.
“Scandalously the European Parliament has refused my repeated requests for a debate on a situation. If this were happening in other countries, the EU would properly regard it as a humanitarian catastrophe in the making. Because it is South Africa the EU chooses to turn a blind eye.
“The world must open its eyes now to what is happening. If it does not it will have blood on its hands for not acting to prevent what will, tragically, be an entirely predictable catastrophe. Hand-wringing after the event will not be good enough.”
Ms Atkinson went over to South Africa in November and held meetings with parliamentarians and members of different communities. As an MEP she has tried to take action in Brussels.
“Last November, when I returned from my last trip to South Africa, I called on the European Parliament to debate the human rights atrocities and political situation in South Africa. It was declined.”
“I turned to my colleagues and said, 'this place tries to pride itself on upholding human rights and the rule of law. Unfortunately, the Parliament only recognises certain countries’ humans’ rights when it is safe to condemn individual countries or persons for political reasons.'”
“'But for a country like South Africa where they are desperate to believe in the Rainbow Nation, to think that those now in power, the unfortunate legacy of Nelson Mandela, it is too difficult and ideologically impossible to question its future, its human rights abuses and the lack of rule of law.'”
On Tuesday Ms Atkinson wrote an open letter to Boris Johnson regarding South Africa, which you can read here.
Katie Hopkins, journalist and conservative commentator, and now part of Rebel Media, is just back from South Africa where she spent two weeks investigating the true situation on the ground. While there she wrote:
“Being a white farmer in South Africa is statistically one of the most dangerous jobs on the planet.”
At the time Ms Hopkins wrote that, there had been 41 attacks on white farms in 40 days.
Yesterday Katie Hopkins gave a lengthy and exclusive interview to the Editor of Facts4EU.Org:
“With the expropriation of property of course it can’t be seen as a legitimate state. The Cape Town water crisis shows this: they can’t guarantee water security. Coming up the pipeline is them becoming a net importer of food. Very soon they won’t be able to guarantee food security. If you can’t guarantee food and water, what else is there before you become not viable as a country?”
“I want a commitment from the EU and from the main international aid donors that they are not going to deliver aid when South Africa can no longer feed itself. It happened in Zimbabwe and we gave them food aid. Please spend that aid on getting asylum for white farmers who – it is predicted – will be genocided out of the country within a 3-year time period.”
You can read much more of what Katie Hopkins told us in a subsequent article in this series. You can also find out more on her website.
We have been researching this series of articles for some time, but even we were taken aback by the speed of events this week.
The Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) President & Commander in Chief, Julius Malema, led the debate in parliament on Tuesday of this week:
Julius Malema, EFF                                    © SA Parliament
“The time for reconciliation is over. Now is the time for justice.”
"Land must be expropriated without compensation for equal distribution.”
- Julius Malema, President & Commander in Chief, EFF - SA Parliament 27 Feb 2018
The EFF describe themselves as Marxist-Leninists. The EFF is the third-largest party in both houses of the South African parliament, with 1.1 million votes in the 2014 general election.
The EFF have a protest song with a catchy lyric: “Kill the Boer, kill the white man.” Despite the obvious criminal and terrorist nature of this organisation, neither the South African government nor the EU has condemned it.
The ruling ANC party agreed with the EFF in Parliament on Tuesday and said they would vote in support of the motion:
“The ANC unequivocally supports the principle of land expropriation without compensation as moved by the EFF.”
- Government Minister Gugile Nkwinti, ANC - SA Parliament 27 Feb 2018
A state, failing to protect an entire section of its population
In South Africa there is a terrorist organisation acting as a political party (the EFF). Then there is the government party (ANC) agreeing with the EFF that property shall be taken from its owners, without compensation.
In other words, the systematic and organised theft of property by the state will shortly be official South African policy.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org has conducted extensive research, unable to believe that the EU hasn’t condemned or made any comment on what is going on in South Africa.
The EU is a vast organisation but if someone has said something we can’t find it. The person whom the world would normally expect to speak up about such things is the Vice-President and High Commissioner, Federica Mogherini. Ms Mogherini is an Italian former communist who is the de facto Foreign Secretary of the EU.
The EU is quick to condemn people it doesn’t like. The President of the United States, for example, comes in for repeated criticism from the EU. He gets this even for posting a tweet.
Viktor Orban, Prime Minister of Hungary, isn’t top of the EU elites' Christmas card lists either. He was the first national leader to address the EU’s migrant crisis in a practical way and some of his controversial policies were subsequently copied by many other EU states including Austria and Germany. Bizarrely this seemed to make him even more unpopular in Brussels.
In the EU Parliament and elsewhere Sir Nigel Farage has possibly suffered more abuse at the hands of MEPs than anyone in the history of the EU. He has been repeatedly condemned by the heads of the various left and centre political groupings such as Guy Verhofstadt and Manfred Weber.
So in the EU we have an organisation capable of quick opinions and quick condemnations. But when it comes to ‘the Rainbow Nation’ of South Africa, the EU seems to have lost its voice.
In order to get some perspective on any matter, a modicum of history is helpful. In the next article we look back just 20 months, to around the time of the British EU Referendum.
We think you will find that article interesting. If you can help us to fund the remainder of this series of special reports on the EU and South Africa, there's a link to donate below. You can sponsor us publicly or be anonymous, with as small or large a donation as you wish!
[ Sources: Janice Atkinson | Katie Hopkins | Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA) | Dr Johan Burger, ISS | Lauren Southern | EU Commission | EU Council | EEAS | EU Parliament | ECHO | ANC | EFF | FFP ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       08.30am, 03 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Steve R, UK      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 09.15am
Message: S.African whites here should be able to claim refugee status, which would be for a genuine reason. Those left in SA need help to escape. A charity called Zane helps those left in terrible circumstances in Zimbabwe, including black people. Politicians and journalists in Europe will not be interested in reporting this.
Name: Shelagh Parker, Manchester      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 08.40am
Message: Why is everybody too scared to pick up on the South African crisis and white genocide? I am originally from South Africa, I left 14 years ago, I had to unfortunately leave my daughters behind, with the dangerous situation I had to pull them out, Britain wants to send them back, very well educated but cannot work because the Tier 2 visa is useless, and companies here are too scared to employ South Africans, because they are charged the earth and penalised for bringing SA's in. As for whites waiting to take back SA, not a hope in hell will that happen. They are outnumbered and there will be a slaughter of whites, as there is anyway. White people in SA have become unemployable, because you have to employ a black man, whether he is qualified or not, so many whites in squatter camps, just waiting to be killed. How sad when all our fathers and grandfathers fought in the war for the British. My son in law's grandfather earned an MBE, does this matter to Britain? No.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
                                                   © YouTube
Yesterday at Mansion House in London Theresa May delivered the third in her series of speeches about Brexit.
For 43 minutes the Prime Minister laid out her – and the government’s – latest thinking on the exit of the United Kingdom from the European Union.
Any textual analysis of a speech like this is necessarily subjective so we will do this in our ‘Observations’ below.
WARNING: We've now read some other organisations' analyses of the speech. It seems our view below isn't popular. Hey ho.
*      *      *
Do you remember how David Cameron used to argue that the United Kingdom parliament was sovereign because it could (theoretically) vote to leave the EU?
The day-to-day reality was that ministers were unable to change and improve things in their respective areas of responsibility because whatever it was that they wanted to do was covered by EU law.
That was not parliamentary sovereignty. It was the pretence of parliamentary sovereignty.
Yesterday Prime Minister Theresa May gave her third major speech on Brexit, following her Lancaster House and Florence speeches.
That speech wasn’t Brexit. It was about the pretence of Brexit.
1. Short, but felt like it went on for hours
The speech lasted for a total of 43 minutes, but a lot of it told us nothing at all about Brexit. For example:
“When we take the big calls, we’ll think not of the powerful, but you.
When we pass new laws, we’ll listen not to the mighty but to you.
When it comes to taxes, we’ll prioritise not the wealthy, but you.”
Sorry Prime Minister, not only is this nothing to do with Brexit, it’s also the most awful baloney.
2. The 5 tests of nothingness
The media love little themes they can report, so Mrs May – or rather her scriptwriters – came up with a new one: ‘the 5 tests’. Here’s the summary of these :-
“First, the agreement we reach with the EU must respect the referendum.
Second, the new agreement we reach with the EU must endure.
Third, it must protect people’s jobs and security.
Fourth, it must be consistent with the kind of country we want to be as we leave: a modern, open, outward-looking, tolerant, European democracy.
And fifth, it must strengthen our union of nations and our union of people.”
We were disappointed that there wasn’t a sixth test: Brexit must be nice to kittens and bunny rabbits.
3. The ECJ and EU law
Mrs May made clear that she will bend over backwards to ensure British courts bow to ECJ rulings wherever possible.
Upbeat Tory MPs will say that she has ruled out the jurisdiction of the ECJ. No, she hasn't. Watch this space.
4. Keeping aligned to the anti-competitive EU
“As with any trade agreement, we must accept the need for binding commitments – for example, we may choose to commit some areas of our regulations like state aid and competition to remaining in step with the EU’s.”
No, Prime Minister. We will do as we damn well please thank you.
“So I want the broadest and deepest possible partnership – covering more sectors and co-operating more fully than any Free Trade Agreement anywhere in the world today.”
Why, Prime Minister? The IMF has just said that 90% of the world’s growth will be outside the EU. Why aren’t you a little more interested in that?
“First, our agreement will need reciprocal binding commitments to ensure fair and open competition.”
Mrs May wants us to think this will be to our benefit. It won’t. Any commitments like this will be used to bind the UK to the uncompetitive social policies of the EU.
“We must ensure that, as now, products only need to undergo one series of approvals, in one country, to show that they meet the required regulatory standards.
“To achieve this we will need a comprehensive system of mutual recognition.
“The UK will need to make a strong commitment that its regulatory standards will remain as high as the EU’s. That commitment, in practice, will mean that UK and EU regulatory standards will remain substantially similar in the future.”
No. No. No.
If this only applied to goods to be exported to an EU country, then fine. That’s what happens all around the world and it doesn’t need to be stated. If you want to sell a Dyson to the USA, it must comply with US standards. This can be abused to protect home markets but in general this is the ‘norm’.
The problem we currently have is that the EU imposes its standards on all products made in the UK, regardless of whether or not they ever stray across the border into the EU27. Be in no doubt, the EU will try to insist that all its standards and all its working practices must apply to UK manufacturers, even if they are for the domestic UK market or for sale to, say, Australia.
One of the Brexit dividends is to lift the burden and cost of excessive regulation across the 88% of British business which never goes near the EU. It’s clear from the Prime Minister’s words that she’s going to be soft on this.
5. Staying members of EU agencies
“We would, of course, accept that this would mean abiding by the rules of those agencies and making an appropriate financial contribution.”
You can see where that is going.
“And, of course, Parliament would remain ultimately sovereign. It could decide not to accept these rules, but with consequences for our membership of the relevant agency and linked market access rights.”
Yup, who does that remind you of? Any resemblance to David Cameron telling us that parliament was sovereign when we all know it isn’t?
If you still aren’t convinced, Mrs May goes on to say this:-
“So to conclude on goods, a fundamental principle in our negotiating strategy is that trade at the UK-EU border should be as frictionless as possible with no hard border between Northern Ireland and Ireland.
“We believe this can be achieved via a commitment to ensure that the relevant UK regulatory standards remain at least as high as the EU’s and a customs arrangement.”
6. Leaving the Common Fisheries Policy
Yes, but....
“But as part of our economic partnership we will want to continue to work together to manage shared stocks in a sustainable way and to agree reciprocal access to waters and a fairer allocation of fishing opportunities for the UK fishing industry.”
Why couldn’t she simply say that we’ll be leaving the CFP and leave it at that? It’s clear she’s going to negotiate some fudge that will leave our fishermen as angry as they are now.
7. Services
This is a technical area, particularly in relation to financial services which we have covered previously. The Prime Minister didn’t add anything useful here.
8. Post-Brexit Britain
“Nor is Brexit an end in itself.”
Oh yes it is, Prime Minister. You never really have understood the suffocating menace that is the EU, have you? To say Brexit isn’t an end in itself would be like a wartime leader saying that victory doesn’t matter, only the rebuilding afterwards.
Brexit most definitely does matter. We want a full, clean Brexit, without so many compromises and fudges that no-one knows we’ve left.
Is that so very hard to understand, Prime Minister?
9. Splitting the difference
In the final section of her speech, the Prime Minister highlighted why she has been so poor in the last year and a half.
“The approach I have set out today would: implement the referendum result, provide an enduring solution, protect our security and prosperity, helps us build the kind of country we want to be, and bring our country together by commanding the confidence of those who voted Leave and those who voted Remain.”
Theresa May seems concerned about ploughing a line between the Leave and Remain vote. Well we have news for her. Leave won.
No-one is suggesting that we act as if there weren’t a Remain point of view. But Theresa May is acting like there weren’t two clear choices on the ballot paper. We voted as a country to leave. That’s all there is to it.
Finally – to echo the Prime Minister’s final words yesterday - “let’s get on with it.”
[ Sources: No.10 ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.45am, 03 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 04 Mar 2018, 08.42am
Message: Following my first impression of Mrs May's Mansion House speech, I have reviewed the speech several times over and have formed a conclusion. I first acknowledge and agree with the Facts4EU analysis in entirety.

I have wanted to give Mrs May the benefit of my doubts so many times, but now feel wholly betrayed by her handling of it. She has been walked all over by the EU commission and has appeased their bullying tactics. The EU has played upon that weakness. What part of "LEAVE the European Union" does Mrs May not understand I wonder? Mrs May has introduced five tests for Brexit. We don't need any test, for the decision was made on 23 June 2016. This opens up a new set of proposals the EU will doubtless play on. The Mansion House speech was pure political spin (to be kind), and pure political garbage (to be unkind). When the commission think a speech is okay, we should probably do the opposite!

I do not believe any longer Mrs May is the right person to carry Brexit through as this is just the start. I am certain there will be heated exchanges behind closed doors. Mrs May [a remainer] has not publicly stated she now BELIEVES in Brexit and BELIEVES in our country. I don't want to hear ridiculous political 'soundbites' made up by 'number-ten' back room boys. I wonder whether or not Sir Bill Cash who chairs a Select Committee can summons Mr Barnier to his committee to give evidence? In that way, we see what is going on. After all, Mr Barnier is taking serious decisions that affect us, yet he's unelected. Others have been called to give evidence so why not Mr Barnier? Either way, it's okay for Mrs May to say "let's get on with it", but on whose terms?

I am not impressed and feel Mrs May should now consider her position to be replaced by a Brexiteer PM (this does not need a general election). However, if she were to play 'hardball' she could be our heroine?
Name: Zorro, Wokingham      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 6.49pm
Message: Agree with your analysis and plenty of comments on John Redwood's blog about the strategic and tactical errors in this speech. She has to go because she is a walkover who has stated that she won't walk away or go for a WTO solution. She will be left jabbering at the negotiating table until she drops and we will continue paying billions per year in a never ending transition/implementation period. useless. Period.
Name: Brexiteer, Braintree, Essex      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 2.18pm
Message: The only redeeming factor in all of this is, any deal negotiated will be rejected by one of the EU institutions or countries. We will then leave and trade on WTO rules. It will save the UK taxpayer £40 billion and form the clean break we need. Forget all the clamour about the Customs Union, it's just a means of protection against countries outside the EU trade competition. Forget the Single Market, it's not working see the CIVITAS report on it. We traded more with EU countries before the birth of the Single Market. Most of the UK trade is services, not covered by the single market, and we trade more with third countries than the EU.
Name: Patrick H, London      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 1.37pm
Message: This is not Brexit! It is a political carve-up, supported by Brussels and the establishment elite! T. May's puerile mockery of the "normal" citizens of this country is deplorable. I have never heard such political disingenuous claptrap, insensitive nonsense and rancid disdain for her fellow citizens from this "not-sure-where-I-am" Political advocate! she having her speech written by A-level students? I wanted to give T. May the benefit of the doubt (one more time) up to yesterday, but clearly, she is never going to deliver the Brexit that we voted for...she is sadly in the hands of the Bankers, without any shred of an idea how the mood of the people is shaping up? No wonder the majority of the Remainers and the Brussels elites are happy! Double-Cross springs to mind! She is a nice girl in the pit of vipers! God help us!
Name: Chris, Devizes      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 10.39am
Message: A predictably weak and useless response from the treacherous May. In some ways, I hope the Soubry customs union amendment succeeds, because that will ultimately trigger an election, and she will be forced to stand down as leader.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 03 Mar 2018, 06.50am
Message: My first impression is great sadness, almost anger, that we've been sold out. Mrs May's speech in my view didn't go anyway near far enough or bold enough. This was not a British Prime Minister talking of a sovereign independent and self-governing nation. To me it sounded like Brexit in name only (BRINO). This is OUR country and I'm damned if I'll be governed by a foreign entity, whether associated or otherwise. Mrs May was not convincing and didn't really send a blunt message to the EU commission, that we were prepared to exit without a deal, though during questions it was briefly mentioned (but I still wasn't convinced). I voted to Leave the EU to get 100% sovereignty back, to exit CJEU oversight, to exit all EU institutions, and so on. After all, we the electorate, never gave our elected MPs a mandate to give away all this in the first place. Nor did we ever agree to the EU power-grab. This leaves me wondering what use our politicians are if our Prime Minister cannot bluntly TELL the EU, this is what the UK is doing, when we're doing it, and so on. Much was said about the Irish border, but it wasn't convincing! We don't want that, the RoI don't want it, and N.Ireland don't want it. Mrs May should have been more clear and forthright on this matter as it worries many. It should not require interference by the EU commission when we say we will NOT be making that border an issue (the problem is the EU are making it a massive issue). I am unconvinced whether Mrs May was being tough or not, though I concede she appeared more outgoing. I am left feeling Mrs May is being 'rail-roaded' into a political position, rather than delivering Brexit.
                                                   © EFF
(To see all parts of our Special Report, click here)
This short series of articles is about something happening right now.
It's about an Establishment of EU elites with its own foreign policies of which Remoaner MPs and peoples around the EU27 aren’t even aware.
We will show you the hypocrisy and cynicism of the EU, in the face of the dire predicament of working people in a foreign country living under threat of torture and death, and the imminent seizure of their property and livelihoods.
We hope you will read this article and the ones that follow. Some busy people have kindly spoken exclusively for Brexit Facts4EU.Org, to inform you of what’s happening:
Some of those we've interviewed (or are trying to interview) for this series
Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA) and Chief Whip of FF Plus party
Janice Atkinson MEP and Vice-President of ENF
Dr Johan Burger, Institute for Security Studies, Pretoria
Katie Hopkins, journalist & conservative commentator
Lauren Southern, journalist & conservative commentator
Brexit Facts4EU.Org 2018
One of the above is a South African politician, one is an MEP from the EU Parliament, one is a South African expert on internal security, and two are journalists & conservative commentators. Janice Atkinson, Katie Hopkins, and Lauren Southern have all recently returned from separate fact-finding missions. They all have very interesting things to say.
  • The EU has been funding South Africa since 1994
  • EU has ignored systematic white murder in South Africa for years
  • South Africa is about to expropriate citizens’ property, without compensation
  • The no.3 economy in Africa - and biggest in Southern Africa - is becoming dysfunctional
  • The EU Parliament won’t even allow South Africa to be discussed
If the EU condemned apartheid and backed sanctions in the 1960s-1990s, why isn’t white farmer genocide and expropriation of property without compensation condemned in the 2000s-2020s?
Remain voters, is this the EU you voted to remain in?
In the coming articles we will look in more detail at the EU’s hypocrisy over the South African government’s steady descent into anarchy. We will do this with the help of exclusive contributions from Janice Atkinson MEP, Katie Hopkins, Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA), Dr Johan Burger, and Lauren Southern.
We are fearful of a major international crisis on the horizon. What is happening in South Africa is deeply shocking, yet barely a word is heard in the mainstream media. And all of this is happening with the support of the EU elites in Brussels, who have yet to issue any condemnation of any kind.
This is something you won’t get on the BBC and we hope you will find this short series informative. You will certainly learn a lot about 'your' EU and the shocking, murderous situation for white farmers in South Africa.
And when it comes to the relevance for Brexit, it's important to continue shining a bright Brexit light on the failings of the European Union that we voted to leave in 2016.
[ Sources: Janice Atkinson | Katie Hopkins | Dr Corné Mulder MP (SA) | Dr Johan Burger, ISS | Lauren Southern | EU Commission | EU Council | EEAS | EU Parliament | ECHO | ANC | EFF | FFP ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       07.45am, 02 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Michael Wood, West Wales      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 5.55pm
Message: I have no personal experience of South Africa and have never been there. However, I know a local farmer who has a South African tenant. He - the farmer - has told me twice that his tenant says the white South Africans are preparing to take the country back and are just waiting for disturbances to break out in Europe on a large scale and they will then take whatever action they deem necessary. They feel that European Governments will have too much on their plate to worry about what is happening in Africa. Anecdotal, I know. I feel that the EU has bitten off more than it can chew and its time will end in violence! I always look at Facts4EU first thing each morning along with John Redwood's site. Another that is very useful and may be known to your contributors but you may edit out is Gates of Vienna. I support them financially! They had a piece recently on a Syrian migrant in Germany who has been allowed to have his two wives and six children kept by the state and with the prospect of bringing in a third wife from Syria. Surely the Germans are going to get sick and tired of the privileges afforded to these people who never intend to work and openly admit it as well. They are a complete waste of resources that will not produce a viable return for the Germans' money. Multiply this several times over and it is bound to lead to disaster, To think that we in Britain are also funding polygamy. I am about to make a small donation!

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
                                                   © Parliament TV
Yesterday saw several Brexit developments on both sides of the Channel which are consequences of the British government’s negotiating methods.
Below we look at a shock concession from Mrs May which was given away with nothing asked in return, and the new draft Withdrawal Agreement issued by the EU.
During a lobby briefing yesterday it was announced by the British government that EU migrants will be allowed to continue entering the UK up to the end of the Transition Period.
This means that any EU citizen can come to the UK with a permanent right of residence, for three and a half years after the British people voted to leave the EU and end freedom of movement. EU migrants will be able to continue arriving up to 31st Dec 2020, under the government’s latest concession.
It is unclear why such an important and highly controversial decision was announced using the unattributable lobby system, instead of by using the normal government announcements system, or indeed by this being announced in Parliament.
Yesterday the European Commission published its draft Withdrawal Agreement between the European Union and the United Kingdom. The draft Agreement “translates into legal terms the Joint Report on the progress achieved during the first phase of the negotiations”. In other words it confirms what was agreed in Theresa May’s pre-Christmas scramble to get a ‘Phase One’ deal.
It also integrates a legal text on the transition period, based on the latest supplementary negotiating directives adopted by the 27 Member States in the Council (Article 50) on 29 January 2018.
The draft Withdrawal Agreement consists of six parts – including introductory provisions, citizens' rights, other separation issues such as goods placed on the market before the withdrawal date, the financial settlement, transitional arrangements, and institutional provisions – and a protocol on Ireland / Northern Ireland.
In a classic piece of Eurospeak, this “Northern Ireland protocol operationalises the fall-back solution in the Joint Report for avoiding a hard border on the island of Ireland, which applies in the absence of other agreed solutions”.
The draft Withdrawal Agreement will now be discussed by the EU Council and with the Brexit Steering Group of the European Parliament (led by Guy Verhofstadt) before being formally issued to the UK for negotiation. It would then need to be ratified by the Council, the European Parliament, and the United Kingdom government.
You can read the full, 119-page draft Withdrawal Agreement here. To warn you, this is a fairly large download. It includes a legal text on the Transition Period.
The ‘Joint Report’ which described the basis of Mrs May’s pre-Christmas deal on ‘Phase One’ is available here.
The ‘Supplementary Negotiating Directives’ that were issued by the EU one month ago are available here.
Michel Barnier yesterday                                                   © EU Commission
The ‘Protocol’ issued by the EU yesterday means that the United Kingdom maintains “full alignment with those rules of the Single Market and the Customs Union which, now or in the future, support North-South cooperation, the all-island economy and the protection of the 1998 Agreement.”
In other words, the EU want to split the United Kingdom and to make the residents of Northern Ireland second-class citizens.
This is the default position of the EU as things stand. The EU goes on to say that “This regulatory area would allow for the free movement of goods to operate on the island of Ireland, and would include provisions on agriculture and inland fisheries, the Single Electricity Market, environmental protection, and state aid, amongst others.”
In summary, the documents released by the EU yesterday are so far away from anything that could be agreed that any line-by-line dissection of them is pointless.
Both the detail and the overall approach are unhelpful in agreeing anything sensible with the EU. For example, the Transition Period will only be agreed as part of the overall Withdrawal Agreement. This means that negotiations could still be taking place in March next year, as the UK formally ‘leaves’ the EU, leaving no time for the UK to make alternative arrangements.
To take a completely different example, there is to be an “independent Authority to monitor the implementation and application of the citizens' right part of the Withdrawal Agreement.”
This Authority will have the power to receive and investigate complaints from EU27 citizens and their family members, and to conduct enquiries on its own initiative concerning alleged breaches by administrative authorities of the UK of their obligations under the citizens' rights part of the Withdrawal Agreement.
A separate justicial body from that of the UK, working in the UK, taking complaints from EU27 citizens and even investigating the UK on its own account without even a citizen’s complaint?
On Northern Ireland, naturally the Republic of Ireland would love the solution proposed by the EU. Unfortunately Eire’s new, young politicians don’t seem to understand that they are playing with fire, and the EU certainly doesn’t know enough about Irish politics.
Incidentally, does anyone in the UK realise that the peoples of the EU27 now think that the Good Friday Agreement was somehow brought about by the EU? This is a little like the way the EU won WWII and kept the post-war peace ever since....
We hate to say it, but this is what you get when you put a weak, vacillating person in charge, who does not understand anything about the EU mindset or how the EU works.
It’s what you get when your leader hates making decisions.
Over all, it’s what you get when you put a Remainer in charge.
Brexit Facts4EU.Org calls upon all decent MPs who genuinely believe in democracy and who therefore believe in implementing the result of the Referendum, to speak out with great clarity and authority against the EU’s draft agreement.
We further call on all Conservative MPs to contemplate very seriously whether the country can afford to have Theresa May in charge any longer. Brexit is the most significant political event in two generations. Now is the time to have our best Prime Minister in charge, not one of our worst.
There is no need for another general election. If Blair and Brown could do it, so can the Tories change leader mid-term.
The draft Withdrawal Agreement and Protocol is so completely unacceptable on so many levels that it isn’t even worth considering seriously.
Someone needs to call the EU over to London and explain some basic facts of life. Presidents Tusk (Council), Juncker (Commission), and Tajani (EU Parliament) should be called in to No.10 and told the facts of life very bluntly. Forget the organ-grinder’s monkeys such as Barnier and Verhofstadt - tell the Presidents of the EU’s main 3 bodies. Then call Angela and Emmanuel and tell them too.
The UK is going to be an independent country on 29th March next year – sooner if the EU don’t start to behave reasonably. The EU does NOT tell us what to do. It does NOT impose its draconian, totalitarian authority on the free peoples of the United Kingdom. It does NOT make demands which no independent nation in the rest of the World would ever accept.
In short, the EU needs to put down the cognacs, start picking up the espressos, and recognise the realities.
Or we walk.
[ Sources: EU Commission | No.10 ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.10am, 01 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Chris, Devizes      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 4.04pm
Message: Reply to John Finn, UK: "I see Facts4EU and its readers are still making the mistake of believing that a change of leader will help push the Brexit process in the direction we would all like. IT WON'T."

It will if there is an election. May has no chance of winning based on her dismal performance at the last election, but a new leader definitely would.
Name: Norman, Taunton      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 3.24pm
Message: A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the Public Treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidate promising the most benefits from the Public Treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy always followed by dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. During those 200 years, these Nations have progressed through the following sequence: from bondage to spiritual faith, from spiritual faith to great courage, from great courage to liberty, from liberty to abundance, from abundance to selfishness, from selfishness to complacency, from complacency to apathy, from apathy to dependence, from dependence back in to bondage.
- Alexander Fraser Tyler (1748-1813), The Decline and Fall of the Athenian Republic, 1787
Name: John Finn, UK      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 3.19pm
Message: I see Facts4EU and its readers are still making the mistake of believing that a change of leader will help push the Brexit process in the direction we would all like. IT WON'T. JRM, Boris or even John Redwood won't be able to make the slightest difference. Parliament simply won't allow a hard Brexit. This has been the case since the 2017 election - and was probably the case before it. Theresa May knew this when she took over as PM. That's why she called an election (on the advice of David Davis). Real Brexit was effectively killed off when May failed to secure a decent majority.
Name: S Ashurst, UK      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 2.06pm
Message: Actions of the undemocratic EUSR: Has the EU under Commissioner Federica Mogherini and Michel Barnier using their Federal Powers taken over responsibility for the North/South border on the island of Ireland? Leo Varadkar, the Irish Taoiseach, is cosying up to Barnier and Sinn Fein in an attempt to disrupt brexit and keep the whole of Ireland in a customs union. Even eventually to take over Ulster. Trying to say the Good Friday Agreement is endangered by the UK leaving the EU is nonsense. The real problem has always been and remains the sectarian divide with the desire of Sinn Fein and the IRA thugs to unite Ireland by force. The most important part of the agreement was - An end to sectarian violence, with paramilitaries decommissioning their weapons. Membership of any part of the EU, including forcing N.I. into a customs union with Eire cannot guarantee that. Only the Irish people can prevent the actions of the IRA, proscribed in the UK and an unlawful organisation in Eire. The UK always unilaterally gave the ROI exceptional terms subsequent to the Republic seceding from the Union (the CTA) and they pre-date any EU connection.
Name: Chris, Devizes, Wiltshire      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 11.10am
Message: It is abundantly clear that Agent Cob is trying to use the Soubry amendment to defeat the government and trigger an election, but I'm not so sure he would win. Firstly, his new 'a customs union' commitment will anger millions of Labour voters who voted leave. They will see it for what it is - Staying in the EU in name only. Secondly, I think his 'young vote' will be reduced, now that his £27,000 bribe to every student has been exposed as a lie. However, a crucial first step to a Tory election win is to ditch May. I'm sure that a strong charismatic leader such as JRM would receive huge support in the Country, and he would win a sizable majority. Unless May is complicit, and is actively trying to thwart Brexit along with Hammond and Rudd, she must surely realise the game is up, and she stands no chance of winning an election with her still as leader.
Name: Not4EU, UK      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 10.10am
Message: The only way now for any form of a decent deal now is for May to step down (ill health) & have a full-blooded Brexiteer in charge & that any 'deal' is negotiated from outside the EU as we will just leave on 29th March 2019 so it's WTO for trade until a deal is reached. It needs to happen now, so that there is one year's notice of certainty for everyone. This will be the only way to 'clear the slate' of Theresa the Appeaser's unnecessary capitulations for nothing in return. May is living proof that appeasement does not work. All she's found is that appeasement to the EU and the anti-democratics in the UK have only resulted in demands for more. This latest surrender document issued by the EU should be used as a piece of toilet paper & handed back to them. It doesn't take a leap of imagination to see that the effective annexation of NI would lead to similar demands for Scotland & Wales (despite the Welsh voting to leave). May is making a pig's ear of the whole job. The collusion between the EU, the official opposition & influential anti-democrats becomes clearer as they are not even hiding it any more. Why was Blair discussing our country's future with Barmier yesterday? Why was Starmer holding parallel negotiations with Barmier, also yesterday? The big speeches. It looks for all the world collusion to effect Regime change here & keep us tethered & under EU control. Yet May still does nothing & concedes more yesterday.
Name: Patrick F, Kent      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 07.01am
Message: How many times do the EU have to tell our Prime Minister and the UK that the EU is not our friend, before she grows a backbone and walks. She needs to deliver and act on the speech of her life tomorrow. We voted to Leave. How many times do we have to say that? We, the people gave the government our instructions. Act on those instructions not the EU's, Mrs May.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
Dr Fox in US trade discussions                                               © DIT
The Rt Hon Liam Fox MP made an uplifting speech on Tuesday. We thought you might like to read it.
It's entitled "Britain's Trading Future" and you can read it in full here.
In separate news, Toyota has announced that it is to build the new generation Auris model at the Burnaston factory in Derby.
The engines for these vehicles will come from Derby. This will be the sole production site for this model in Europe, with engines primarily sourced from Toyota’s Deeside plant in north Wales. In total, 3,000 jobs will be secured across the two sites.
Toyota has a long-established relationship with the UK, producing 4 million vehicles and 5 million engines over the last 25 years. Today’s announcement follows Toyota’s decision last year to invest over £240 million to upgrade Burnaston to improve the plant’s competitiveness by installing its latest production platform – the Toyota New Global Architecture – to ensure the plant produced the most advanced models for the European market. This will be the third generation Auris to be built at the Burnaston factory, underlining the skill and expertise of the plant’s world-class staff.
The UK’s automotive sector continues to thrive with the UK currently the third largest European car producer with the highest productivity among Europe’s automotive producing nations. The sector generates £14.6 billion, representing 8.2% of the UK’s total manufacturing gross value added.
[ Sources: Dept for International Trade | Office of the Secretary of State for Wales | Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy ]
     Journalists and politicians can contact us for the full list of links, as usual.
       06.45am, 01 Mar 2018
Please send us your comments and we will publish them here. You can of course use a pseudonym if you prefer, and it's always nice to know roughly where you're writing from. Please always state the headline of the article you're commenting on.
Name: Jon, Wales      Date/Time: 01 Mar 2018, 7.51pm
Message: I find it disgraceful UK broadcaster's and much of the mainstream press fail to relate good news on a daily basis to the great British people, with such news items as that of Toyota, for example. They should give as much good news airtime and column inches as they do for Brexit? I support all foreign companies having confidence to invest in the UK, as they understand politics often get in the way of business, but importantly, the UK is a great place to be. This is why we need Brexit Facts4EU as we don't get many factual details elsewhere. The UK is a global trading nation, and the EU is holding us back because of their own self interests. They are frightened the UK will do well as others may wish to exit their club. On that basis, the EU commission will never offer us a good trade deal, so we must tell them we tried to discuss but can no longer allow this charade to continue, and inform them whilst we wish the EU well, we're going to WTO terms?
“OH NO...”
“I knew I forgot something.”
“I keep meaning to donate to
those poor, hardworking people at Facts4EU.Org”
Alas none of us are hedge fund managers... or married to one. The Team (and one member in particular) has donated as much as it can. Can you please help fund our work?
Unlike many Brexit websites, we do our own research, write our own content, and create our own graphs.
Unfortunately we barely make it from one week to the next and we rely 100% on voluntary contributions.
We really could use your help in working for a clean and true Brexit.

One-off or monthly donations. Quick, easy, and very safe.
Donate Donate Subscribe
Any amount
From £2
Be a supporter.
One off donation
from £25 for 1 year
Be a supporter.
Monthly donation
from £3 per month
Choose amount FIRST:
THEN click button:
(Anonymity respected completely if you prefer to remain private)
This list is being updated.
       Best regards, the Facts4EU.Org Team, 2018
To read our output from 15-28 Feb 2018, simply click here.
We have also researched and published some excellent reports before this.
Please use the news archive menu at the top of the right-hand-column of this page to access those.

We rely on donations from the Public and from sympathetic benefactors.
Please read our 'Help Needed' page for details. is non party-political and not supported by any Brexit campaign.
We present facts we've researched from official government and EU sources.

Now that the Referendum has been won, we have 2 main aims:
1.  To provide bullet-pointed and factual summaries of key points, to help people to ensure Brexit is delivered in full.
2.  Crucially, to allow MPs and campaigners to give reliable and consistent facts to the public.
Please don't hesitate to contact the Editors if you can volunteer in some way, and particularly if you can support us financially.
NEUTRALITY: focuses on information which shows that the UK is better off regaining its independence and growing globally. The entire weight of the Establishment is promoting the opposite case, so this site is just one small voice trying to redress the balance.

All material © 2018 except where owned by others.
Press and Leave campaigns please contact us for re-use of information.