Monsieur Boris,
I’m responding to the five point
clause in the UK’s PM letter dated; 02/10/19 concerning the Irish ‘backstop’
and suggested alternatives with a few weeks to go until -- 31/10/19; I write unequivocally
in response in the same bravura I read the correspondence. For the art of courtesy,
I continue this jolly-old-fiasco that’s in-keeping with the UK PM's demeanour.
Without really saying, I am altogether invigorated at the progress the UK is
making in providing the validity that the EU is dealing with a crowd-pleasing
act which belongs in Billy Smart’s
circus.
To cut to the Tom & Jerry chase… the proposal
isn’t something we could possibly support as part of any final deal. I’d refer
to our telephone exchange whereby we came to a verbal consensus a Brexit plan
has to be fit for purpose to be taken seriously determined via the state of the
union and the UK’s unwritten constitution. Both parties had the gentility to
abide by such rules and the EU did give the UK longer than 30 days to arrive to
a proposal; unfortunately the hours and days weren’t used wisely to fulfil
something of credence.
Of course, Number Ten were avidly
keen on what the EU27 think about the Billy
Smart circus performance as far, ‘how are you finding it, do you have any
suggestions…?’ This isn’t a time for a Simon Cowell appraisal regardless of
brevity and now the Prime Minister has underlined the definition of I’d rather ‘die in a ditch than ask for an article 50
extension…’ by being forced to ask for an extension. Each of the EU27
members felt it was only correct to contact a florist at this sad time. And as
Westminster insider, and Spectator contributor
James Forsyth claims, the UK position is brinkmanship and betokens their
election campaign, not that there’s a General Election. On a Pascal Lamy front,
I think a WTO tariff nation who
barters on about brokering deals who’ll be enforced to add admin and export
duties is a profound non-negotiating position for member states to pontificate;
why they’re happy to be at the back of the queue – awaiting Britain’s
protectionist implosion.
Anything titled: A Fair and Reasonable Compromise,
usually means the opposite --- as a rule such mantra fills the EU’s negotiating
team which is working to protect our 27 state philosophy with a stiffer cement–
you might as well send Brussels Van Gogh’s earlobe with a love letter explaining
how glorious it has been being part of this peace mission that’s made our
continent brimming with prosperity and culture - a fair and reasonable conciliation
indeed. Notably the ‘backstop’ isn’t a bridge to nowhere it’s a passage to
respecting peace in the region without threatening a hard border or digging a
310 mile ditch.
As Turkey threatens the EU with
opening up the gates to 3.5 million Syrian refugees, I notice there’s a fine
line between rhetoric and impracticality, eventually the bottle is empty and
you’re left with the thick head of overly speculating over a decent lunch. What
is profound is the Isolationist’s mantra is anti-British, an elected parliament
votes for the Benn Act (2019); keen followers of self-destruction flood the
interactive threads by seasoning the term: treachery. Europe looks on with
aghast with what Blighty has unleashed through constitutional dysfunction. And
furthermore, repeating the failure of the Withdrawal Technicality Draft through
the House of Commons has no dwelling on the EU’s position, so why tactically
create a blatant blame game, devised to stir the natives.
Remember the EU isn’t sovereign
and the UK has a sovereign parliament, overriding any decision the EU agrees to
– hence, meaning the impasse starts and ends with the UK being a divided
nation. Herewith, the EU Parliament waits for movement on par to a
Gastroenterologist, the opposite to Dr. Hannibal Lecter. Although, the EU27
believe that typhoid and Nigel Farage come from the same place, without
sounding like a hypochondriac, there’s societal contamination of some kind; so always
best to disinfect every lunch-time. You can’t blame me.
Particularly enjoyed the joke
about electronic good surveillance, in your letter, to resolve the NI/Irish
border fiasco within weeks of the deadline – claiming that with flexible and
creative innovation will eliminate the need of a backstop (our insurance
guideline). Here’s my advice…Save that for an after dinner speech or a thirty
year old birthday party Mr. Johnson, it’ll get a hoot from your audience,
especially those offering ‘surveillance technology lectures’ in hotel suites.
The ‘Yellowhammer report’ by UK’s risk assessor is the evil uncle in a ‘Mills &
Boon’ love story, about summer loving in June 2016; it happened so fast - met an Isolationist ideology as cute as can be.
Now we’re entering the winter blunderland; you lose an hour monsieur Johnson.
You’re forced to count all the UK’s administrations’ own goals, too many to
count; presumably another Her Majesty’s Department has to be created. Now the
PM is seeking an extension in all circumstances as the clock ticks five to twelve – I believe our dear
friend, Charles Perrault wrote the classic. Now you’re running about in search
for an ugly sister you rejected not so long ago. Any heel, sorry deal will do. I, try not to laugh at the primal hubris.
Lastly, in your letter you claim
you accept rules by a differing parliamentary entity; this begs the question…
you are aware that the UK has MEPs marooned on our parliament seats like seals
basking in the sun; armed with vetoes and a microphone, all expenses paid? The
UK was a founding Father of this great union. Then I read that the UK proposes
that the Northern Ireland Assembly should have the opportunity to endorse ‘arrangements’
before they enter into force. But Stormont doesn’t exist! How do these so-called ‘arrangements’
get endorsed in Northern Ireland and frequently, every four years? Collective
consent necessitates assurances without them the ‘arrangements’ will collapse.
To ascertain this is a fair and reasonable compromise is about effective as
erecting a giant wooden rabbit in Number Ten’s rose garden expecting it to eat
dandelion leaves.
I am copying this letter and
paper to other members of the European Council and to Michel Barnier
Yours ever,
Jean-Claude Juncker
Comments
Post a Comment