28 OCT 2019

NHS Vote

The Labour Party have launched a hostile and untruthful campaign attacking the Lib Dems.

Their amendment to the Queens Speech sought to promote their own damaging reorganisation of the NHS. The NHS itself has, after a long period of consultation with patient groups, the workforce, unions, Royal Colleges, the voluntary sector and academics from think tanks, launched a clear set of recommendations for future NHS legislation. As chair of the Health and Social Care Select Committee I have also worked in tandem with the NHS throughout this period and my cross-party committee scrutinised their initial draft. The following are links to the NHS's own clear asks of Parliament and to my committee's report which preceded that final version.



The clearest ask of all from the NHS was not to subject the service to another major top down administrative reorganisation and I think politicians have a duty to listen. Labour's proposals however would create turmoil and are unwanted by the NHS.

The NHS's own proposals include a pragmatic way to ditch the competition rules and reduce the wasteful procurement and contracting rounds. This would be a better way forward and it is deeply disappointing that the Labour Party have chosen to launch this attack ad campaign which is misleading at every level.

You may be interested to see that Labour's claims have also been condemned by the independent fact checking site Full Fact https://fullfact.org/health/liberal-democrat-nhs-privatisation/

I am grateful to you for reading this and I want to assure you that Lib Dems will be listening to those who work in and alongside the NHS and those who lead it, not following a damaging political dogma.

1 comment

Good luck with your campaign ,we want you as are MP . Robert James Slapton
- Robert James

Post a comment

28 OCT 2019

The Last Chance to Stop Brexit is Now a General Election on December 9th

Liberal Democrats believe that a People's Vote is the best way forward to stop Brexit. After 19 Labour MPs backed Boris Johnson's Brexit Bill last week and Jeremy Corbyn again refused to back our People's Vote amendment, we have reluctantly had to accept that we do not have the numbers in Parliament to make this happen. Wishful thinking is not going to break the current impasse in or stop the Prime Minister forcing through his bad deal, which will affect us all for generations, on a rushed timetable without proper scrutiny.

This week is likely to be the last chance to stop Brexit and we think that bringing forward a general election date is now the only realistic way to give people a final say before it is too late.

The Bill we are proposing would set the date for a General Election on December 9th, take No-Deal off the table, and prevent Boris Johnson from rushing through his own bad deal and controlling when the next General Election takes place..

There are millions of people across this country who are sick of Brexit, believe that we are better off inside the EU, and they deserve a better choice than two Brexiteers in Johnson and Corbyn.

We are ready to take our pro-European message to the country, where our policy will be that a Liberal Democrat majority government will revoke Article 50 to Stop Brexit. We do not want to trash our economy, put a border down the Irish Sea or sign away environmental and employment protections. Johnson's deal won't "get Brexit done" it will only get it started by kicking off years of further wrangling over our future relationship and trade negotiations in which we will be the junior partner. The only way to stop the division, cost and chaos of this whole miserable saga is to stop Brexit.

While the alternative route of a vote of no confidence would remove Boris Johnson, if an emergency Government could not be formed then it would be Boris Johnson who picked the date of the next election, and he could pick a date after any extension and crash us out with no deal. Boris Johnson has proved we cannot trust him, so we do not think it is right to give him any power to do that.

If Boris Johnson really wants a general election, which he repeatedly says he does, then he should be prepared to put his Tory government's record to the people on December 9th.


Your "last chance to stop Brexit"? I still find it extraordinary that your latest Party's leader Swinson is so brazen about wishing to overturn the result of a democratic referendum approved overwhelmingly by Parliament - the result of which the major Parties undertook to honour, then and prior to the 2017 Election. It's cocking a snook at the people and at democracy. You yourself did so when you turned from Leave to Remain at the time of the referendum, and this year you held up two fingers to those who voted for you, switching first to the little TIG grouping, then nominally to being an independent when TIG proved a flop, and now to the LibDems. Let's see how the voters of Totnes consider the propriety of your actions, when they vote on 12th December.
- Tony Harrison

Agree completely with Tony Harrison.
- Jane Dev

Post a comment

20 OCT 2019

We need a Statesman as PM, not this showman

Whatever happens next, we are in dangerous and uncharted waters when a Prime Minister chooses to ignore the clear purpose of an Act of Parliament. Sending a photocopy and a side letter to the EU shows the Prime Minister has abandoned Statesmanship for cheap showmanship.

I joined the majority of MPs in voting to protect against No Deal in the immediate future. The debate on Saturday also made it clear that the Government's current proposals risk No Deal once the transition period comes to an end and I will continue to oppose this unless the people have given their consent to the actual Brexit deal as opposed to the false promises of the referendum campaign. The Deal will put a permanent border down the Irish Sea that will inevitably lead to the breakup of our United Kingdom starting with Northern Ireland and then Scotland. It will deliver an economic downturn of the same order as the banking crash and it will remove the protection of workers rights and environmental standards from the internationally binding treaty and switch these to the wish list of the non-binding political declaration. The Deal does not "get Brexit done", it is merely the start of long and acrimonious wrangling over the future of our relationship with Europe in which we will be the junior and relatively powerless partner.

At the weekend hundreds of thousands of people marched to demand the final say and I was delighted to meet so many of those who travelled from this constituency to join them. I will continue to press for everyone to have the opportunity to decide if the Deal delivers the kind of Brexit they want or to ditch Brexit for good.


The 2016 vote was to Leave the EU. There were no Terms and Conditions. Some MPs think they know better than those who voted to leave and that is deeply offensive. Leaving means this country has the opportunity to trade with the world and not just a ‘private safe club’ for those invited in. I cannot understand how MPs can support another vote simply because they PERSONALLY disagreed with the Referendum outcome. Their PROFESSIONAL duty is to uphold Democracy whether they like the result ir not. It is difficult to watch them tearing up our democratic principals and being supported by the Speaker of the House. Its mob rule and its disgraceful. Dr Wollaston. I dont understand why you think I should support you as you have changed party and views so many times.
- Jane Dev

It's a bit rich for MPs like yourself to speak of the PM avoiding scrutiny when you have jumped ship how many times? - without offering your constituents the chance to get rid of you and choose a Conservative party member. Please do not presume to be 'holding the PM to account' in my name; my concern is about who is holding you to account as you ride roughshod over the clearly stated direction of the voters, and how on earth to get through to this wrecking parliament. Finally, if this is the third time your summons has been turned down by the PM, then your committee must be bent on vexatious time-wasting tactics that were not used on previous holders of the office.
- Melanie Grieveson

Post a comment

12 SEP 2019


Like so many people, I'm deeply worried about the violence of language and behaviour that has become so common in our politics. As this becomes ever more divisive and with both main parties drifting to their extremes, I'm very glad to have joined the growing band of Liberal Democrats in the moderate, progressive centre ground.

I gave a clear commitment at the time of joining the Lib Dems that I would vote for a general election so that you can decide if you would rather be represented by an MP from a different political party. I have kept that promise but the government did not reach the two thirds majority required to trigger an election. It is very likely that this will only mean a short delay as the PM has lost his majority and excluded 21 of his moderate Conservative colleagues.

Following the vote, the Prime Minister decided to shut down Parliament for five weeks, cutting off all the opportunities for MPs to hold him to account. I deeply regret the fact that he is running from scrutiny and we are even hearing that he may decide not to obey the law.

I have tried to do everything I can to flag up the serious risks of a No Deal Brexit. I think it is really important to make sure that everyone can have a say on the final arrangements. I think it would best for that to be through a People's Vote, but if that is ruled out by the PM and we have a general election, the Liberal Democrats will be campaigning unequivocally to stop Brexit.


Since the rejection of the result to the referendum by parliament it has shown just how anti democratic they are. This has caused great concern to the people who belieced the result would be accepted. The falling standards are due to this betrayal of the people.
- Johnny Norfolk

I reject this comment for three reasons. Firstly, the commenter doesn't understand the nature of parliamentary democracy, where we elect MP's to use their own good judgment on our behalf. Dr Wollaston, and other MPs who are aware just how serious No deal would be, are therefore not antidemocratic. Secondly, the commenter confuses those who voted to Leave (52%) with the whole of the nation, and therefore misuses the word "people." Thirdly,I object to the use of the word "betrayal." Such a word, with its suggestion of retribution, is inappropriate in a democracy. Have those of us who voted to Remain betrayed the nation?
- Robert Lawson-Peebles

The only party drifting to the extreme is the Non-Liberal Non-Democrats. The people voted overwhelmingly in the largest referendum ever held in the UK to leave the Federal Superstate. Please adhere to our democratic principles.
- Jean Genie Totnes

Leave now and start rebuilding our country together. Politicians with in fighting and party politics have prevented any progress in the country ifor 3 very long years. If they had been contracted to deliver this by a private employer and after 3 years had made no progress the board would be held accountable and fired.... Give the country a general election now and allow us to do just that. Not wait until it suits them to play more games.
- Margaret Henderson

Totnes and Torbay voted to leave the EU, and both of their democratically elected representatives voted for Article 50. Then they reneged, adopted the LD position of 'Bollocks to Brexit' (an example of non-divisive language, presumably), and in one case compared betraying their constituents with 'casting off a dirty raincoat'. So keep the hysteria going, try to make accurate criticism 'unacceptable', or else call an election and give your constituents a chance to elect someone who believes in their own manifesto.
- Jim Brodie - Totnes

I must disagree with the three posters above. 1: 52% of those voting in the Referendum to Leave is hardly an "overwhelming" majority. It is a misuse of the word "the people" to suggest that 17.4 million who voted Leave represent a population of over 60 million. 2: To continue to debate the most serious issue in the future of the nation since WWII is hardly "game playing." 3: I think Dr Wollaston shows great courage in changing her mind, and her carefully argued post can hardly be called "hysteria." It is Alexander Johnson, familiarly known as "Boris," who is stoking the fires of hysteria, and turning the Conservative Party into a Brexit Party.
- Robert Lawson-Peebles

Under our democratic system it's first past the post wins, with losers going along with the result. Yes, there could be better methods but until then that's what we must live with. Doesn't 'playing the game' mean anything any more, how many sore losers are there out there or is it just a few spoilt individuals ?
- John

John's comment above helpfully shows that general elections and referenda are both subject to the "first past the post" system. With general elections, people are given the opportunity every few years to change their mind about those who govern them. So why shouldn't it happen with referenda? A democracy is succeeded by a dictatorship when people are not given further opportunities to vote. Germany in the early 1930s is a case in point.
- Robert Lawson-Peebles

Sarah. You stood in front of a packed audience in Stokenham Parish Hall in October 2016. You stated to our faces that whilst you had voted to Remain, you would respect the outcome of the referendum and work for a good Brexit. You have lied to the electorate who voted you in as MP. If you had one shred of honour you would resign your seat and stand for re-election on a LibDem manifesto.
- David Kerr

Robert. Agreed, there's no reason not have another Referendum in a few years if the electorate seek it !
- John

The behaviour of MPs in Parliament today nails the lie that remain supporting MPs are only fighting against a no deal Brexit. They could have voted for a fair and equitable deal today (Saturday) but yet again they have used parliamentary procedure to avoid voting for a satisfactory deal. Their ongoing betrayal of 17.4 million voters has been laid bare - they are engaged in a campaign designed to thwart the democratically expressed will of the people. They will never be forgiven for this and neither should they be. In addition to leaving the EU this country is in need of root and branch reform of the political system as it is no longer fit for purpose. What an appalling day for democracy!
- David H

When we joined the EU , the voters who voted not to join had no say after ! The same applies now , The Remain vote LOST now get on with leaving !! The outcome of leaving is not important, its about democracy !
- Adam L

Post a comment

12 JUL 2019

No Deal is a disaster for local farmers. I won't be voting to destroy local businesses

The National Farmers' Union (NFU) has said that a No Deal Brexit is the worst possible deal for the farming industry.

The Food and Drink Federation (FDF) has called it a "grisly prospect".

No Deal would lead to bankruptcies and shortages hitting local businesses and consumers alike. The UK has a trade deficit in food, drink and animal feed products with both the EU and with non-EU countries.

The UK imported £46 billion of food products in 2018, 70% of which were from the EU. These imports are necessary because we are not and have no prospect of being self-sufficient in feeding our nation. We are currently 61% self-sufficient in all foods and only 75% sufficient in foods that can be grown here. Whilst we can source food further afield than the EU, our rapid supply chains for fresh produce from our nearest and most important trading partners will inevitably face disruption, especially so if there is a bad tempered exit alongside threats to renege on international commitments.

As it stands, EU farm subsidies to the UK currently make up around 50-80% of farm income. The CAP currently provides nearly £4billion of support annually to farmers across the UK as well as providing a market safety net. There is a serious question mark over whether the Government will continue to offer this support in the long term after Brexit and, if our economy takes a hit even close to the levels predicted, we are unlikely to be able to afford these as well as the host of other commitments that the leadership candidates have signed up to. Something will have to give but these costs have not been properly set out by those claiming No Deal will be pain free.

The government has assured the industry that all rules and processes, regarding farm payments, will remain the same until the Agriculture Bill is introduced in to the UK Parliament but farmers are understandably anxious about the long term.

They are even more worried about the short-term impact of a No Deal scenario because WTO tariffs will immediately be applied for EU trade, as well as WTO rules for plant and animal health checks.

These will have major impacts on both import and export markets, consumer choice, the speed of supply chains, and prices.

Tariffs are usually higher for agricultural products than for other goods and services and perishable products such as fish and meat from local producers are very sensitive to delays at borders. Without an alternative arrangement, the EU will treat the UK as a third country and a range of tariffs as well as costly checks, registrations and certifications will start to apply for the first time and these costs will leave many local businesses unable to compete.

Agriculture is also impacted by the no deal effects of other policies e.g. immigration (for seasonal, agri-food workers and vets).

If the UK wishes to sign Free Trade Agreements with non-EU countries such as the USA, we may be required to alter standards and accept intensively reared animals which have been fed hormones or antibiotics as growth promoters or whose carcasses have been treated with products like chlorine.

I know there are some MPs who feel all this is a price worth paying for Brexit, but this is easier to insist on when their own livelihoods are not at stake. I won't be voting to put local farmers out of business, to risk lower food standards or to have completely avoidable shortages and higher prices.


Wollaston is an utter disgrace. I voted for a Tory MP and have been robbed. When is the by-election? Cretins like Wollaston have brought politicians into contempt.
- George, Paignton

I'm sorry that George of Paignton feels like this, and his dismissive words about Dr Wollaston - who gives serious reasons for her decisions - does nothing to help his cause.
- Robert Lawson-Peebles

You were elected because you represented the Conservative party, and accepted the job on that basis, you are paid a substantial sum plus many benefits to do that role, when you decided to leave the Conservative party and go “Independent “ then Liberal” the honest and decent thing for you to do was to hold a by-election. But no ,Sarah hangs on to he benefits and over generous pension, I believe in 2011 you sponsored a bill that called for any MP who resigns from their Party, to be required to hold a by-election, like most things doesn’t apply to you. As far as I and many other constituents are concerned you are receiving the tax payers money under false pretences . Your very keen on changing the rules as often you change your mind. You want a 2nd Referendum, let your constituents have theirs by way of a by-election.
- Peter Paignton

Sadly Sarah now lives in a bubble as can be observed that at every interview it is I, I, I, with no concern for the people that elected her. It is not enough to say you're working for your constituents best interests whilst ignoring them. Seems like a case of 'doctor knows best !
- John

Well here we are again, witnessing double standards from pro remain MPs that have used every opportunity parliamentary procedure offers them to thwart the democratically expressed will of the people to LEAVE the EU. Now we hear them shouting foul because we have a Prime Minister and a Goverment that is using parliamentary procedure to DELIVER what the public voted for! Boris Johnson and the current Goverment are the real Democrats in parliament. The rest, including Sarah I'm sorry to say, are abusing their position to try and override the democratically expressed will of the people and they CANNOT be allowed to get away with that any longer. Boris and the Goverment have my full support.
- David H

Dear George of Paignton (although I doubt you are really called George or that you live in paignton) Please take your Brexit party bile elsewhere. You contribute nothing to the debate.
- Bob

Is Paignton is Sarah Wollaston's constituency? There seem to be negative comments from there which should perhaps be directed elsewhere?
- Ruth

Ruth, of course part of Paignton is in Woolastons constituency, I unfortunately voted for her, or rather the Conservative Party, still a Conservative. Your comment shows the level of your political knowledge, and bias.
- peter paignton tq33xu

The NFU have also said that they are VERY HAPPY with the Withdrawal Agreement that Boris Johnson has negotiated, yet you do not support that either. In fact the NFU spokesman for Devon said that Boris' WA delivers the best possible options for the farming community as we exit the EU. What ARE you supporting this week, besides Remain and Extinction Rebellion - it certainly isn't respecting 17.4 million people or the health of democracy in this country - because you most definitely DO NOT represent the farming community.
- Elizabeth Graham

Post a comment

03 APR 2019

Brexit Update

I wish I could be responding with more positive news but the truth is that Brexit has left us deeply divided and that is reflected in our politics and Parliament. We have reached gridlock. The Prime Minister's deal failed to pass for the third time and none of the alternative options presented by backbench MPs reached a majority. The greatest number of votes was for a referendum on the final deal and the slimmest margin of defeat was for a customs union to be added to the deal.

The legal position is that, unless a deal is agreed by Parliament, we leave with No Deal in little over a week's time. This is I know the preferred option for many who have written to me but not for the majority. It would lead to such serious real-world harms both locally and nationally that I could never support it. It would mean knowingly and deliberately voting to make this community poorer and for many of my constituents to lose their jobs and livelihoods.

I won't don't that.

It could not be more obvious that the problem with the original referendum was that it never defined which of the many versions of Brexit was on offer. The risks, trade offs and benefits of No Deal, Canada Plus, Norway, Norway Plus and the Prime Minister's Deal are all very different but campaigners were able to talk up the benefits and downplay the risks. It turns out that we cannot have our cake and eat it and that countries are not queuing at our door to sign up to advantageous trade deals.

Our future prosperity is already taking a hammering with the steady drum beat of industries and agencies taking future investment and jobs elsewhere. The list is long and growing, from car manufacturers to pharmaceuticals and the European Medicines Agency and this will have a ripple effect far beyond their immediate home towns and cities. Many local businesses including farming would also be hit, particularly by No Deal.

The impasse in Parliament could be broken if the Prime Minister simply agreed to combine the support for her Deal from the government benches with the wide cross party support for putting the final deal back to the people to check it has their consent. It is a great shame that she has so rigidly refused to countenance this.

The PM has now announced that she wants to reach an alternative compromise with Jeremy Corbyn. Few expect this to work if the Prime Minister listens to compromise arguments and then presses on with her own plans. Her current position seems more like running down the clock to No Deal with the ultimatum of accepting her Deal or going over the edge.

Today, back bench MPs are trying to press through a bill to extend the date of that cliff edge. In my view any extension must be long enough to allow the government to put this decision back to the people for a final say either through a general election or a second referendum.

Ultimately, a compromise for a softer Brexit would be preferable to risking the known harms of No Deal but I still feel it would be wise to check that it represented the will of the people and to give everyone the opportunity to have their say, not just MPs.

Without that final say, any decision will continue to cause division and acrimony long into the future.

If confirmed, Parliament could rapidly implement the defined deal or revoke Article 50 depending on the outcome and we could finally move on together.

We all want to be able to focus on issues other than Brexit.


Well said. There are many outside the Westminster Bubble who support your sensible approach to ensuring the best way forward for the UK. Good luck, stay strong and keep going.
- Malc

Hear hear, As I have said in correspondence, please keep up your stand on this, although I recognise it has cost you. It seems crazy after over 45 years for Brexiteers to be panicking over taking a bit of extra time to get things right. I agree that whatever (if anything) TM and JC are able to come up with as a way forward, the final proposal on leaving must be put back to the people in a binary referendum with 'Remain' as the other option. (I was never keen on a referendum as the means for deciding this, but accept it is probably the only way to get out of the mess.) Best wishes,
- John


Surely the only referendum that could possibly satisfy democracy would be a vote on whatever deal comes up versus leave with no deal - I would be firmly in favour of this. Surely Remain was defeated in the first referendum? If our MP supported this choice, I would be much more sympathetic to her cause but alas, the only thing on offer is to remain in the EU against the wishes of the majority of the electorate at the time of the referendum.
- Patrick, Brixham

As usual your blog contains comments from 'remainers' that are refusing to accept the original referendum result. If the first one is not honoured then the second one has no legitimacy whatsoever. What we do need, regrettably, is a one year extension to our membership so that there is time to ditch the Trojan Horse, Theresa May, and renegotiate the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement, which cannot be allowed to pass. As for the PM and Corbyn offering a so called 'confirmatory vote' on Theresa's rotten deal or a Customs Union that idea is RIGGED from the start! If the public have to decide on where we go from the shambles we are in then ALL of the options should be available to choose from, including Canada Plus and a managed 'no deal. Unless of course you subscribe to the theory that members of the public are too thick to make their own decisions, which I am sure many in the Westminster bubble firmly believe. I must admit to a deep sense of forboding when the referendum result was given to Parliament for implentation, but nothing could have prepared me for the unfolding deceipt and treachery that is being rolled out on a daily basis. Our Parliament is disfunctional, outdated and rotten to the core.
- David H

Have to say, yet again Dr Wollaston pursuing her own agenda. This is not what you were elected to do! The idea of a 2nd referendum (actually 3rd on this subject) is so null and void it's mind-bending. It basically says 17.4m ppl, of which 29,308 voted Leave in the South Hams, should be ignored because remainers want a 2nd go at it. Bear this in mind when you are running for re-election. Further more, what this 2yr exercise has proved is that MPs / civil servants have so little real word experience that they just can't negotiate a deal. To me, Dr Sarah, you have repeatedly ignored your constituent's wishes, the gravy train ends now. At most you've got 2yrs left in this job and unless you've got an exit strategy planned the real world is going to be a shock to you, including the shambles that you & the Labour party have left the NHS in.
- Neil Patterson-Azzopardi

Those of us who normally don't get involved in politics and are reserved and polite by nature for once were allowed to speak out and are now horrified by the aggressive devious behaviour of some undemocratic remainers seeking to deprive us of the clear decision to rule ourselves. For clarity everyone knows that means leaving EU control (borders, customs, market, money, justice). We are the majority in England and Wales according to this week's YouGov poll (without an agreed deal or extension on 12 April then 44% want a no-deal exit and 42% remain). So now is the time to combat those dishonourable changelings by speaking up, locally and nationally, by writing and voting and indeed taking to the streets (as before the Iraq war). Let us use the systems in place like the Government Petitions website to help the emerging and accelerating vote for the promised fallback position at https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/248281 Since I moved here in 2010, I have come to admire Totnesians for their independence and their retention of traditional English values going back over the centuries. We should now see that extended to the whole of our once great country. Just like Blair and Charles, powerful or rich remainers and outsiders with vast vested interests (especially in London) have hired spin-doctors, PR firms and fake media outlets to disguise the truth, using highly emotive wording like cliff-edge, catastrophy, hard vs soft, crashing out, backed by an exchequer using its usual project fear threats of collapsing GDP and employment, with spiralling debt. Negotiation is hard but already the EU has (just) voted to confirm UK citizens will continue to benefit from 90-day visa-free travel to member states after a no-deal Brexit. WTOK !
- Jean Xavier

It's not Brexit that has left us divided. It's 45 years of European treaties that there was never popular consent for. Sarah for you there will be no more issues after Brexit. You are a liar, and have no future beyond the next election...which I expect to be soon.
- George, Paignton

It is amusing to see 'Slippery Sarah' talking of 'moving on together''. The opportunity for that was for all participents in the Referendum to accept the result; not too difficult unless you are selfish, privileged and consider yourself superior !
- John

Well here we go again! The UK is bending over backwards to accommodate the latest string of demands from the EU and what do we get in return? Arrogance, belligerance and complete intransigence that is humiliating this country all over the world. They know damn well that the Irish backstop is the main stumbling block and yet they steadfastly refuse to do anything about that. If their written assurances about the 'temporary' nature of the backstop are worth anything why don't they include them in the legally binding Withdrawal Agreement? The answer is their assurances are WORTHLESS and their sole objective is to force Theresa May's lousy agreement on us so that we can be well and truly screwed during any future trade talks. Theresa May has to go immediately and be replaced by someone that is up to the job. This total shambles cannot be allowed to continue any longer!
- David H

"Good to know Dr Sarah you are still "respecting the result of the referendum" Does this mean that if I came to you as a patient you would be "respecting my right to privacy" by publishing my personal details in the Sun? Only asking.
- Martin Beagley

Why would anyone think Dr. Wollaston reads these comments? But on the off-chance... You said, ...It would lead to such serious real-world harms both locally and nationally that I could never support it. It would mean knowingly and deliberately voting to make this community poorer and for many of my constituents to lose their jobs and livelihoods. I won't don't that... What an utter disgrace. You have absolutely no insight into your supposed alarmist and dystopian future. The option to leave or remain was a UK vote, not a constituency vote. As an MP, in this matter you should be acting on behalf of the majority, not traitorously following your own agenda. Don't be misled: we've all seen through you.
- John, Brixham

Eleven days to the Euro Elections, latest poll gives the Brexit Party 34%, Change Party 3%. Suggests to me that Sarah and her sidekicks have completely misjudged the public. They are really so out of touch that they should think about getting proper day jobs and not have their selfish views paid for by the Public Purse !
- John

Wollaston's behaviour is disgraceful. Since when does "principled" mean ignoring the wishes of your electorate?
- Tony

Six days to go and down to 1%. Let's see how Sarah spins that one !
- John

Let's see, with the Euro results in, the Brexit Party in the South West scored 36.7% of the vote and three seats; Dr Wollaston's new home "ChUK" got 2.8% - and no seats in the entire country. Say no more.
- Tony Harrison

Well done to the Brexit Party. They have effectively put all MPs on notice that if they don't deliver the 'clean break' Brexit that our electorate voted for then after the next general election they will - thank goodness for Nigel Farage. With regard to the EU election result we are now seeing the Labour Party trying to curry favour with the remain camp by offering a second referendum. This is being promoted as a solution to everything when in reality it would be a step towards complete anarchy. What on earth leads so called rational people to believe that a second referendum result that went the other way would be accepted by 17.4m people that have already voted to leave? If the democratically arrived at result of the first referendum is not implemented then democracy in this country is DEAD and only anarchy could follow. We need to LEAVE on 31 October, preferably with a legally binding agreement on a free trade deal, or if that is not forthcoming from the EU then regrettably on WTO terms. The fture of our entire democracy depends upon that.
- David H

Latest poll, Change UK 1%, Brexit Party 26%. Think Sarah has to question her judgement and decide what to do next. Suggests she revalidates and goes back to working, She'll be much happier !
- John

Joking apart, I feel highly offended when someone I helped vote in to Parliament, on the back of a Party, are so arrogant that they feel they can ignore a democratic vote, then hop from one Party to another. When that all fails they carry on collecting all the benefits. Diagnosis: Superiority Complex, Muddled Thinking, Disregard for other Opinions, No Staying Power !
- John

Well, bye bye ChUK! Has it finally sunk into that cranium Sarah? Any other party you'd like to try?
- Tony

Which way is the wind blowing? Ah, there she is.
- John, Brixham

Sarah has lost all integrity by not going for a by-election. She had backed a move to make it mandatory where an MP changed party but clearly she doesn't believe it applies to her. The people of Totnes deserve someone who understands the meaning of 'playing the game' and 'sticking to your word'. Could it be that her pay & perks mean more to her ?
- John

Looks like Chuka has chucked it in with the LDs. Another featherlight blowing in the wind - no direction but will feather his nest regardless like turncoat Wollaston.
- John, Brixham

The Referendum vote was to ‘Take back control’ and ‘’spend more on the NHS’, Neither is achieved by a No Deal Brexit. We’ll instead be at the mercy of every other country in the world who can tell us where to go and in recession so we have event less money to spend on the NHS. That’s why we need a referendum on what is to happen now we know what it might mean.
- Paul, Loddiswell

Post a comment

15 MAR 2019

What next for Brexit?

One of the few things that everyone agrees on when it comes to Brexit is that it is all a complete mess. No one voted for this divisive shambles undermining our economy and trashing our international reputation. But the undeliverable promises made during the campaign have collided with reality and a hung Parliament. It's like being locked in a car with a broken handbrake and an incompetent driver, rolling towards the edge of a cliff.

The Prime Minister has twice put her Withdrawal Agreement and Future Framework, to a meaningful vote claiming it to be the 'will of the people'. It certainly isn't the will of Parliament which has rejected it on both occasions by historic margins.

Brexit reality turns out to please almost nobody, neither the 48% who voted remain nor the majority of Leave voters. The Deal is deeply flawed and looks nothing like the sunlit uplands promised during the 2016 referendum campaign. The problem is that the Prime Minister's alternative, to leave with No Deal, is even worse.

In a crowded field, one of the strangest moments of this past week was for the Chancellor and other cabinet ministers to be setting out the stark and grim reality of No Deal, only for the government, just a few hours later, to be effectively whipping their own MPs to vote for it. Many abstained rather than vote for catastrophe. Collective Cabinet responsibility and the Prime Minister's authority have evaporated but given the reality that we are just a fortnight from Brexit, the government limps on.

Thankfully Parliament has made it clear that it absolutely rejects No Deal because of the compelling evidence of the real world harm that would inflict.

The problem remains that MPs remain deeply divided and cannot agree what they do want. Parliament is completely gridlocked.

Meanwhile the Prime Minister continues to stick rigidly to her false binary choice between the Deal on the table and heading over the cliff and intends to bring the Deal back for the third time of asking. There are no changes to the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement and little prospect of a different answer.

At that point the PM has been instructed to return to the EU to ask for an extension to Article 50. A short extension would only help if the existing Deal was agreed and the time could then allow the backlog of legislation to be passed. Otherwise it would be like constructing a gangplank from the edge of the cliff to No Deal. A longer extension however would draw us into elections to the European Parliament.

The Withdrawal Agreement and Future Framework are flawed but this 'warts and all' Brexit is the best that could be negotiated. Whilst an alternative Norway style model with or without a customs union would be less economically damaging, the trade-offs would infuriate hard Brexiteers even more.

The divisive reality of Brexit leaves no one happy. It has already cost us billions and it has drained time and energy away from so many other pressing priorities. We should be striving to end austerity and getting to grips with issues like social care, education and police funding, housing and the environment but instead, two years on, we are still consumed by the hard choices underlying Brexit.

In my view, it is time to take the decision on Brexit reality back to voters. There is no consent to the deal on offer, no one voted for this mess and people should have the right to weigh up the risks and benefits of the actual Deal on the table, or a clearly defined alternative, and decide whether to go ahead or to stick with the deal we already have.

Parliament had the opportunity to show its opinion on this yesterday but for all their protestations to support a second referendum, the Labour leadership, decided to scupper the vote by heavily whipping its MPs to sit on their hands and abstain. The only leadership on offer this week from the Labour benches was from Select Committee chairs like Yvette Cooper and Hilary Benn. More than ever, Jeremy Corbyn looked like an opposition leader in hiding rather a Prime Minister in waiting.


Sarah, you've about turned on Brexit, about turned on MPs having a by-election if resigning from their party (which you have done), spent nearly 3 years spewing unsupportable Project Fear and just lost a vote supporting a 2nd referendum. You persist with this nonsense, do you not see that you've lost all credibility and are no longer fit to be an MP ?
- John

As the PM has said many times no deal is better than a bad deal and she has negotiated the worst possible deal imaginable. Parliament is no longer representative of the people and is openly defying the electorate. As I have said before several times 17.4 million voters will NOT be denied!
- David H

Your up-to-date explanation is very helpful. Thank you for all you are doing to get the best possible outcome.
- Mary Light

ps. should have added that Sarah voted for Article 50, saying No Deal if a deal is not agreed before 29th March !!!
- John

This former NHS worker who retired at 48 after being educated at vast expense by the taxpayer has the audacity and arrogance to ignore the will of her constituents and directly oppose their democratic will. Will she resign and force a by election or carry on extracting money from the taxpayer ?
- Rebecca

Well done, Sarah, please keep fighting.
- Jon B

Thank you for your brave decision to put our country before your Party. Whilst we are all aware of the 48.1 v 51.9 result in 2016, we are now also aware of the false promises made at the time, the electoral irregularities, the illegal funding of the Leave campaignwhich is being investigated by the police and the daily saga of lost orders and companies and wealth being moved abroad. The poor and vulnerable will suffer the most from this Brexit. There is nothing honourable in supporting this deal.
- Tricia L

An excellent local MP and one of the few MPs with both the common sense and the courage to stand up against this coup by the far right. keep up the good work.
- Keith Browning

Unworthy Keith Browning, referring to the 17.4 million as 'far right. Typical retort of undemocratic 'sore losers'.
- John

Glad Sarah is carefully representing the views of the constituency (that voted narrowly to remain), and doing so very thoughtfully and using her own judgement - through the shameful chaos created by the partisan approach adopted over the last 2 years by this defunct govt.
- Margaret

Well Sarah, I have just seen you on TV saying yet again that there should be a second referendum. This time you say it is to endorse the PMs deal, or remain in the EU. This is clearly another blatant attempt by you and your remain colleagues to overturn the referendum result. If there were to be a second referendum there should only be two questions on the ballot paper i.e Theresa May's deal or No Deal. This would respect the original referendum result and allow the public to decide what they really wan't after years of betrayal from rogue MPs like yourself.
- David H

Sarah has the right to change her mind, like many other people have with regard to the UK leaving the EU. There are far more positive reasons to stay with the security of the EU than there are positive reasons to leave the EU. In fact there are no positive reasons to leave the EU. Thank you Sarah for resigning the Tory Whip and standing up to the dictatorship that Theresa May has developed.
- Philip

Sarah, please keep up your good work. I am livid about the PMs broadcast last night. I am not tired, I’m angry. It’s time to revoke A50 and start over. A PV on a rational deal that has support of HoC, or revoke and get back to real business. People (like David H above) talk about “respect for the referendum”. There should be no respect for a referendum, which was based on lies and deceit. 26% of the population and 34% of the electorate is NOT “the British people”. People like Farage claim the biggest democratic exercise ever, but is afraid of a PV to confirm a narrow 52-48 “victory”. There is nothing to celebrate in Brexit. All deals make us poorer. I agree with Philip above, there are no positive reasons to leave the EU. All this nonsense about “taking back control” is right wing crap. How much money has this country now wasted over the last 3 years (must be coming from the magic money tree) on civil servants, consultants, parliamentary time, hiring fridges to stockpile medicines, and on and on? David Cameron and the Conservative party should be banished for decades from power for the damage they have caused this country. How lucky we are in the South Hams to have an independent-minded MP willing to stand against this madness. Well done and thank you: it can’t have been easy for you.
- Kevin G

Thank you Sarah for all that you've done - I agree wholeheartedly with everything Kevin G and Philip have said. Well done
- Liz

Well done Sarah. So difficult in this age of fake news and mindless partisanship to stand head and shoulders above the rest of them. My daughter told me this morning why her hairdresser voted to leave - because the Europeans don't vote for us in the Eurovision Song Contest. I think she must be confusing the EU with the ESC!
- Rob

Congratulations Dr Wollaston and your fellow MPs who didn’t agree with the original referendum. The betrayal of both this original referendum and of Labour and Conservative manifesto is almost complete. You have now ushered in a time when half of the electorate will become disenfranchised and who knows who they will vote for. Congratulations Mr Corbyn – your ability to appear to be siding with both sides will see you into Downing Street at the next opportunity – for as sure as night follows day, the Tories will be annihilated for not delivering Brexit. If we thought that Brexit was going to be bad for the economy – well let’s see what this ‘socialist’ government will bring. But alas, hardworking people like myself coming from a very working class background, born to Irish immigrants but given strong values of work ethic, honesty and integrity will suffer – the something for nothing brigade will have free rein in our new socialist paradise until the money runs out. But hey-ho, the continuing globalisation and absorption in to the United States of Europe will continue, life will go on, the majority will continue to be ignored and kept down. Our population will continue to increase at unsustainable levels, our NHS won’t cope, wages will be kept down, we will build over all of the green belt and all in a ‘free’ country where we dare not speak our mind less we are castigated for being extremists and before long arrested for not having the ‘correct’ views. Good luck to all who refused to accept the will of the majority and the resulting impact on what we used to call ‘Democracy’.
- Patrick, Brixham

Don`t despair Patrick, for our democracy to function requires that we stick to the rules, ‘play the game’. The Referendum was won, yet there are weasel words, smoke & mirror arguments by selfish people who feel ‘entitled’, attempting to subvert the system. My bet is they`ll lose again !
- John

The polls say the public do not want a second referendum which includes remain.. Parliament has twice rejected a second referendum.. What happens next? For three years you sat around, voted for Article 50, stood for an election on a manifesto to leave, which I voted for. Then stopped listening to the people and finally stood down before we could voice our displeasure. I am concerned that the continued pretence that Parliament is in any way competent risks the rise of fringe groups and beg you respect the most democratic vote ever held in this country. I am one of an increasing number who are not being represented by our lawmakers.
- Giles, Paignton

Totally agree with the previous comments. It is crystal clear what the majority voted for: 1. To leave the EU, full stop and 2. To do so, preferably with an agreement for a Canada Plus free trade agreement. This would enable a continued business relationship with the EU, but crucially leave us free to sign other free trade deals around the world and there is NOTHING wrong with that. Sadly from the now infamous Chequers weekend which resulted in the resignation of David Davis and subsequently Dominque Raab the PM has pursued her own fudged version of Brexit which satifies nobody, except the EU. As for today's indicative votes whether the 'remainer' MPs vote for a customs union or not remains to be seen. If they do it changes NOTHING - 17.4 million people voted to LEAVE in the face of 'project fear' and ALL MPs have a direct responsibility to deliver the result, IN FULL.
- David H

It is a charade that a majority of the whole adult Electorate voted 'Leave' - that was never the case. Totnes Constituency just displayed sufficient strength to Remain. Usurpation of the Union Jack as emblem of any political Party, especially any whose policies will break up the U.K if implemented, should be declared illegal. The insanity of expecting 237 Trade Agreements to be re- - negotiated to our advantage immediately upon leaving the E U needs to be exposed - at least a decade of difficult talks will be needed.. A 'no deal' Brexit would be ruinous to our economy for many years to come. The interests of the rising generation are side-lined, as also international environmental policies to safeguard our future existence. How will NHS be funded to cope with ageing population ? Our courageous M.P. now stands for Change Britain. More power to her elbow !
- Robin K

@Robin K... Another bleating remoaner. Wind your neck in.
- Richie S

On 15th March you asked “ What next for Brexit?” The next question must be to the 2 candidates for tory leader/prime minister, “Where will the economic benefits you so generously promise actually come from?”. Our potential prime ministers tell us that our leaving the EU will be followed by raised government spending on education, health, increasing the housing stock, and ending austerity. At the same time they are promising, among other goodies, substantial reductions in taxes for both the the low paid and the high paid, in corporation tax and in national insurance contributions; and of course there is also £39 billion to pay to the EU itself. They indicate that the resources to achieve all this are going to come from higher foreign and domestic investment and greater productivity and employment in an economy 'freed-up' by lower tariffs and therefore increased trade with the rest of the world, plus about £9 billion per year in net savings from ending annual contributions to the EU. So the precise question must be, “How will you get the great trading nations of the world to give us a better deal than we now receive as a member of the EU?” The latest data on foreign direct investment into UK from the Office for National Statistics showed a fall of nearly £31 billion at the end of the first quarter of 2019 in the previous 6 months, with investment in quarter 1 at minus about £15 billion. Meanwhile the British Chambers of Commerce Economic Survey for first quarter 2019 showed domestic investment intentions to be the lowest since 2012. The survey also reported the lowest level of export sales since 2009 and more firms indicating declines in cash flows than those predicting rises. On these figures, to afford any of these promises, there will be the need for a remarkable boost to investment, productivity and exports as a result of the “tremendous” trade deals we are told will be made possible by Brexit. Will Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt therefore explain, not only in their hustings for the Tory members, but also to the other 99.6% of the population to whom this is a vital question, how a country with a market of only 65 million will be able to negotiate more advantageous trade deals than the EU managed to negotiate with its market of 550 million? Countries like India or China have populations in the billions, and the USA, Russia, Brazil, Iran and Indonesia also have much bigger actual or potential markets than the UK. These countries pursue very different global policies from those of the UK, including some or all of the following: continuing extensive production and use of hydro-carbon fuels; failure to recognise and combat global warming and its consequences; persecution of ethnic minorities; and murder of civil protesters, journalists and others who oppose dictatorial regimes; aggression against neighbours and disregard of international systems and law. And they will, as we have seen, use tariff policy to achieve their political objectives, including, in the case of the most powerful, penal duties to get their way. Having to agree to import chlorinated chicken might be the least of our worries. Just one example is the certainty that the price for a Chinese trade deal will include us shutting up about Hongkong's rights. So, it is up to Boris and Jeremy to tell us in a bit more detail, how they will negotiate trade deals to make us all richer, not poorer - and please, leave out claims of possessing super powers making you able to achieve miraculous results. David Prag, Brixham
- David Prag

Post a comment

03 FEB 2019

Brexit. What Happens Next

The grim news from Sunderland that Nissan have pulled out from a major future investment, should come as no surprise. Even Patrick Minford, one of the very few economists who Mr Rees Mogg and other hard Brexiteers can rely on to support their views, told a Parliamentary committee that WTO would all but destroy the UK car industry, but inferred this would be a price worth paying. Not for the tens of thousands of people and their families who depend on Nissan for their livelihoods across the North East.

It is not just the steady drum beat of warnings from firms like Jaguar Land Rover, Honda, Airbus and the pharmaceuticals sector that should worry us but the deep concerns of small and medium size companies the length and breadth of the UK about the consequences of No Deal.

It's easy to talk glibly about 'clean Brexit' but there is nothing clean or appealing about the reality of No Deal. I've seen the slogans 'Let's go WTO' outside Parliament, but there is a good reason why no country chooses to trade exclusively on those 4th division terms. All nations prefer trade deals but these are complex and time consuming to negotiate. At a stroke, if we exit with No Deal, we lose the trade deals we enjoy covering nearly 80 countries which extend to us because we are members of the EU. These deals cover around two thirds of all our goods exports and, as with the car industry, it is likely that other countries would prefer to import from nations with whom there are deals in place.

For our part, simply removing tariffs unilaterally on imports from one country, would oblige us under WTO rules to remove them from all which would mean kissing goodbye to major sectors of our own industries. How would our own farmers compete with a flood of cheap imports of lamb, beef and vegetables? The simple answer is that they would not cope with a rush to the bottom on pricing and the inevitable trade offs on welfare standards.

Far from being the 'easiest deal in human history', to quote the International Trade Secretary, Brexit reality does involve difficult trade offs and compromises. We were promised that scores of deals would be ready on the stroke of midnight as we left the EU, that 'Britain would hold all the cards' and that we would retain the 'exact same benefits'.

The reality is that the Prime Minister is  presenting us with a choice between a bad deal that leaves us with no future certainty and No Deal.

It turns out that No Deal is worse than a bad deal - but I do not accept that this is a binary choice. I don't accept that either of these choices can be said to represent the 'will of the people'.

Having lost the vote to ratify the deal in Parliament by an historic margin of 230, the government then cobbled together an assortment of backbenchers to produce an amendment to try to paper over the cracks. The deliberate fiction underlying the so called Brady Amendment, was a mirage that the Prime Minister could unilaterally achieve a renegotiation of the Irish Backstop. That together with offers of constituency bungs for wavering Labour MPs was enough to scrape the amendment over the line last week but I suspect the divisions within both main parties run too deep for that alliance to hold when the Meaningful Vote to ratify the deal returns to Parliament..

There is no prospect that the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement will be reopened and the Brady amendment will have achieved nothing but leave us rolling closer to the edge of the cliff edge of No Deal on March 29th.

We are woefully unprepared for that crash and it is worth looking at the report from the independent Institute for Government which sets out the sheer scale of the legislative and planning backlog https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/sites/default/files/publications/brexit-two-months-to-go-final-web.pdf

Despite the looming chaos, this week Parliament has no Brexit bills on the order paper. On Monday for example, government has scheduled a general debate on sport. I support the cancellation of the February recess but this must be used for serious action on the backlog, not left as window dressing with MPs free to continue any holiday plans they might find it inconvenient to rearrange. We do not have the luxury of time as there are fewer than thirty Parliamentary sitting days until the UK is set to leave an alliance of structures and interdependencies that have built up over more than four decades.

As the countdown to the meaningful vote on 14th February continues, many MPs will be weighing up whether they should knowingly vote for a bad deal in order to avoid the chaos of leaving with No Deal and no transition.

They should not accept that miserable binary choice but make it clear that no responsible government could inflict that kind of pain on the people. I could not remain in the Conservative Party if its policy objective was to deliver such a disaster or if that became its de facto policy after the Meaningful Vote by deliberately continuing to run down the clock.

The current deal is also problematic in that it pleases neither remainers nor the leavers who were lied to about the inevitable trade offs that would be necessary to at least partially protect jobs, livelihoods, supply chains and the wider economy, security and health.

Government could and should rule out No Deal and seek consent from the British People before an irreversible leap into economic decline which will set back our ability to reverse austerity. Checking consent through a People's Vote is the only way to be sure that this really is the will of the people.

It may be that people decide the benefits of Brexit outweigh the risks but this would be in the full knowledge of the version of Brexit involved.

Without this valid consent there is no consent and we face years of ongoing division, recrimination and resentment as the consequences unfold.

There is nothing anti democratic about pausing Article 50 for a further democratic process and I will continue to press for this. In the words of David Davis, one of the most vocal campaigners for Leave, "if a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy".


Sarah Wollaston has almost excelled herself by regurgitating hackneyed misinformation to try to persuade us that undermining a democratic vote is justifiable, pure Project Fear. She attempts to mislead us for her own ends, check her examples and you`ll soon she is exaggerating eg. Nissan making a model in the East because of Brexit, rather than EU directives against diesel engines make it foolish to make a car here that won`t sell well here, whereas it would in Japan. She plumbs new depths by misrepresenting a colleague, David Davis, when he said ‘if a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy’. Yes, he did, in 2012 when suggesting a new referendum would be valid after 40 years from the previous referendum. The Referendum in the 70s had been implemented, we had experience of the result. When we implement the 2016 Referendum and time has passed, we, if we wish, could have another. This behaviour is unworthy of a Parliamentary Representative for Totnes. Whilst on the point of democracy in relation to her beloved EU consider it`s action in regard to Referendums: Denmark Maastricht Treaty Referendum 1992- NO 51% Yes 49% = VOTE AGAIN. Eire Nice Treaty Referendum 2001 – NO 54% Yes 46% = VOTE AGAIN. France EU Constitution 2005 – NO 55% Yes 45% = IGNORE. Dutch EU Constitution2005 - NO 62% Yes 38% = IGNORE. Eire Lisbon Treaty 2005 - No 53% Yes 47% =VOTE AGAIN. Greece Bailout Referendum 2015 - NO 61% Yes 39% = IGNORE. Dutch EU Ukraine Deal Referendum 2016 - NO 61% Yes 39% = IGNORE. Let`s hope we`re never added to this contemptable list. When Sarah asks `What Happens Next`, I suggest if she has her way, what Helmut Kohl German Chancellor and architect of the EU said ` we decided to renounce the framework of the old style nation state. We agreed that the establishment of a common currency is crucial to the process of European political union becoming irreversible`. Yes IRREVERSIBLE !
- John

Einstein said of the Nazi era "The lack of courage on the part of the educated class has been catastrophic". Sarah has courage and judgement, we should be grateful. She is one of the few. Edmund Burke, arguably the greatest philosopher of conservatism, wrote more than 200 years ago: “It is with infinite caution that any man ought to venture upon pulling down an edifice which has answered in any tolerable degree for ages the common purposes of society, or on building it up again without having models and patterns of approved utility before his eyes.” Our society is fractured. Sarah is absolutely correct, MP's need to cobble together an agreement they can live with, seek an extension to Art 50, and put that deal against remain to the people in Ref 2. It's not rocket science.
- Richard

Richard. Yes our society is fractured because people engaged in a vote but do not respect the principle of 'loser's consent'. Instead of pulling together they whinge and whine like spoilt children.
- John

Richard's sycophantic worship of Burke is embarrassing naïve, as is his support for Sarah Wollaston (our would-be Burke?). He is fond of quoting Burke selectively, so let's have some balance by reflecting on facts and his other thoughts. Burke was possibly the worst constituency representative to have ventured into Westminster. No mean feat. He paid his constituents so little regard that even he himself did not dare stand for re-election in Bristol (much preferring the 'rotten borough' of Malton). The man considered an election candidate to be “a bidder at an auction of popularity”...such democratic accountability was much beneath him. The man was a patrician and an utter snob. The Roman Republic would have been too modern for him. Witness “as ability is a vigorous and active principle, and as property is sluggish, inert, and timid, it can never be safe from the invasions of ability, unless it be, out of all proportion, predominant in the representation. It must be represented too in great masses of accumulation, or it is not rightly protected...the power of perpetuating our property in our families is one of the most valuable...circumstances belonging to it…some decent regulated pre-eminence, some preference.. given to birth, is neither unnatural, nor unjust, nor impolitic”. Really? That our model for the distribution of wealth and power in society?! Keep the property in the hands of the aristocrats and out of the hands of capable people. Good luck selling that under universal suffrage(!). Burke never fails..."we have never dreamt that parliaments had any right whatever to violate property". An argument against any form of taxation ever. A tad right-wing even for me, and I'm a Tory. He was an all-rounder, supporting the physical punishment of black slaves. He believed that black slaves should have to buy their freedom, but never came up with an answer for how they were to get the money. Even then he stated that blacks were not civilised creatures and should not attain their freedom until such time as they had secured that desirable status. He believed that poverty was the result of “Divine Displeasure”, not misfortune. Laws of commerce could not be changed because they were “the laws of nature” and therefore the “laws of God”. More Islamic theocracy than One Nation I'd have said. Of course to complete the basket of sins, he was also an anti-Semite. He ranted in the relation to the French Revolution..."Jew brokers contending with each other who could best remedy with fraudulent circulation and depreciated paper the wretchedness and ruin brought on their country by their degenerate councils…". Even after the Revolution, which he deplored but for no decent reason he states "the next generation of the nobility will resemble the artificers and clowns, the money-jobbers, usurers and Jews who will always be their fellows and sometimes their masters." Burke was wrong on slavery. Wrong on anti-Semitism. Wrong on representative democracy. He'd be wrong on the EU and anything else he ventured an opinion on. Citing him as a guru for Parliament's attempts to keep us in the EU against the will of the people is dim beyond conception. He was anti-democratic, reactionary, contemptuous of the people and a racist bigot. Actually, he's the perfect poster boy for the European Union...just not in the way that you think Richard.
- George, Paignton

George. Thanks for your wisdom. My mother used to say, "empty vessels make the most noise". She taught me to respect the quality and brevity of the word. The Brexiteers truly deserve their special place in Hell. The EU have now started to comment on the quality of UK leadership:-- Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s point man on the Brexit negotiations tweeted of the hardline Brexiters: “Well, I doubt Lucifer would welcome them, as after what they did to Britain, they would even manage to divide hell " Senior EU officials also doubted the sincerity of Labour’s offer to the prime minister, fearing it is an attempt to weaken May’s hopes of getting a deal through parliament. One official said: “It is a shame that we have this perfect storm: a lousy government and an even lousier official opposition.” Sarah is absolutely right. We are at a point in our history where principles and judgement really matter. We are not getting either from the leaders of our 2 main parties
- Richard

I get the impression from what I read in newspaper articles that Theresa May is trying to prepare the ground for staying in an EU customs union. This would be totally unacceptable and is NOT in keeping with the referendum result. If pushed through Parliament it will decimate the Conservative party at the next election and result in a total collapse in any faith that remains in our democracy - and there is precious little of that left already.
- David H

Everybody would be wise compared to you Richard. Why don't you come back when you've got some sort of education? Verhofstadt and the other Brit haters are about your level.
- George, Paignton

Sadly so David H. worth watching this to see how our MP and Parliament treats us with contempt : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g6pwZ1saqBc
- John

Thank you Sarah for taking a principled stand on this issue: you have my full support if only from Liverpool! Wishing you and yours well.
- Tom

I am sorry to see the quality of intellectual comment from the Georges of this world so reduced by my fellow George from Paignton. "Brit Haters"? The only hate around here comes from the extreme Brexiteers, who are so committed to damaging our country regardless of the consequences - which have been laid out repeatedly by many respected and respectable think tanks and international analysts. The head in the sand refusal to accept the facts, by the cheap use of the phrase "Project Fear", when the real "Project Fear" is being perpetrated by Theresa May, is risible. I salute Sarah Wollaston for her principled, intelligent and courageous stand. Well done Sarah, it is great to be represented by an MP with guts and integrity. As for the argument that "we must deliver what the people voted for", every serious opinion poll for some considerable time has been showing a majority of UK citizens now support Remain. Why don't those who oppose Theresa May's 'deal to do a deal' because they hate the backstop agree on a People's Vote? That's where the 'Fear' is - because you know that without Russian money behind your campaign, and with the false forecasts of the original campaign now fully exposed, you would lose. Hate and Fear are Brexiteer qualities.
- George Two

With respect George Two - deluded woffle.
- John

Yet again remainer MPs are trying to undermine the UK negotiating position by plotting another attempt at blocking a no deal brexit. Can't these people, including I am sorry to say our own MP understand that the only thing that will get the EU to alter or better still get rid of the backstop is the threat of no deal? Oh, but of course I am missing the real point here. Their real intent is to thwart the electorates wishes and block Brexit at every opportunity, regardless of the mid and longer term interests of the country. Come the next election it will be pay back time for many MPs that are ignoring the expressed political will of the British people.
- David H

David H Completely agree. No deal is a bargaining tool and not voting for Sarah Wollaston at any future election is my intention and the intention of a great many people I know.
- Candy Totnes

Dear Sarah...I agree with almost everything you say about brexit...the last thing we need now is an economic crash when every public service we all rely on is in crisis. We need massive reinvestment in health, education, police and all the local government sevices. It would be lovely if we could invest in more council-type housing so that our young people might have more hope for their futures. None of this is possible with a crashed economy. Brexit has already done enough damage, look at the value of the pound now. If a people's vote can be used to stop the largest collective act of lunacy ever seen when 17.5 million people voted for brexit, then we have an obligation to support it....Rory O'Connor...retired dairy farmer and grand-parent who doesnt want to spoil my grand children's opportunities and chances in life.
- Rory O'Connor

So it seems that de-selection has moved a step closer for our former Tory MP, who I did once support. My understanding is that a vote against her at the AGM in the next fortnight. I am sure that all of Sarah's wellwishers on here will make her feel better. But none of them are Tory you see? And well...she is rather supposed to be adhering to a Tory manifesto. Bye bye Sarah. I'd suggest Sarah resigns before the inevitable and allows Totnes to vote (oh the irony!). That way it might look like she's got an ounce of credibility, rather than having her own local party eject her incompetent and disloyal miserable face.
- George, Paignton

So Sarah has jumped before being pushed ! Do the right thing and call a by election as we didn`t know what we were voting for when we elected you.
- John

Dear Dr. Wollaston Thank you for standing up for what is correct, decent and fundamentally democratic. Your resigning of the party whip shows that you care about the people and future of this constituency and country. I wish you well in the weeks and months ahead and hope that there are more MPs like you who are prepared to do the right thing. Yours sincerely, with gratitude. Zoe
- Zoe

Dear Dr Wollaston Please can you let the people of Totnes know when we can expect you to stand down as an MP and allow us the choice (via a By-Election) as to whether or not we still can support you as an Independent MP for our constituency?
- Sharon Carrino

Well Sarah Wollaston you really do take the biscuit! After almost two years of undermining the Prime Minister and our negotiating team you have now decided to betray your political party and your consituents by joining Labour's breakaway party. In your resignation statement you try to claim the high moral ground, but it is clearly a case of 'jumping ship' before you were deselected. I have spent hours over the last two years pleading for you to support the Government at a time of national importance only to be ignored and betrayed at every turn. I cannot put into words how utterly disappointed and completely betrayed I feel. Politics in this country is now at an all time low, due in no small measure to the way MPs like you have behaved. I will not be voting for you in any election, that is for sure.
- David H

Thankyou for being one of the few politicians to finally take a sensible moderate stand, and meaning that if (as seens entirely plausible) we have a general election next week I will have someone to vote for, rather than needing to spoil my ballot paper again to avoid having to vote for two extreme wings. I rarely write any comments on blogs like this, but you have taken a very brave and courageous decision, and I want you to know that there are equally moderate people here and around the country who wish you all the best, and wish that there were another 600 MPs like you in Westminster!
- Paul, Brixham

Well said, Paul. Thank you Sarah for your principled and courageous decision to leave the Tory party. If you stand as an independent here, I will vote for you.
- Tim, South Milton

Am glad the inevitable has happened. As I have stated on here before, Wollaston, Soubry and Allen stopped being Tories some time ago. One look at Wollaston's twitter feed tells you that she hasn't agreed with a Tory policy on any subject for quite some time. I would say to the disenfranchised people of Totnes...be of good cheer! This is only a good thing. Her voting record will not change as a result of today. It is just that the party and the local people will be free of her. And without the unpleasantness of having to deselect (which was surely coming). It is ironic that they got elected on a manifesto that was clear about leaving the EU. These must be the first group of MPs to leave a party because it WON'T renege on manifesto commitments. And that MPs whose substantial disagreement with the government is that they want a "People's Vote" on the decision already reached to leave the EU...and yet when they have changed party they refuse to consent to a by-election. What happened to "informed consent"?! This arrant hypocrisy will undermine what precious little credibility they have. That's a good thing. And be clear...if they thought they could win a by-election, they'd relish holding it. they care nothing for "democracy"...that's why they love the EU! For all the people queuing up to congratulate her. Fanatical pro-Europeans without a democratic bone in their body. What is to be the difference between the new party and the Lib Dems? And why then would we expect these people to have any more popularity than the Lib Dems? So forgive me if I am not devastated at the threat these three pose to my political vision. I won't post on here again. There is nothing left to say about Wollaston. The only word from her I would be interested in would be "by-election". And when it happens, I'll be there to campaign against any attempt for her to remain as an MP. She is done, and will soon be out of Parliament for good. It's been an excellent day.
- George, Paignton

Thank you for helping rejuvinate the trust in our Politicians , showing that we can be Pragmatic , that we can change our minds when new evidence comes to light and for going up against dogma and demonstrating leadership when we have none . I fully support the move and look forward to voting for you when the chance comes .
- G David

Have commented before about your lack of faith in your constituents but your judgement to jump ship reminds me of the time you believed in Brexit then changed your mind when you maybe thought it was not in your favour. Now you are looking to a new party to justify your decision. Would never go to you for a second opinion, Farage's party will sink you and your cohorts.
- Jane

Thank you for doing the decent thing. Stay true to your conscience and keep smiling.
- Stan, Brixham

So Sarah has jumped rather than being pushed. True to her 'beliefs' this way she keeps her salary, expenses and perks. Truthfully, I cannot decide wether she is deliberately spewing disinformation or is basically ignorent of the facts. Is she out on a limb for her beliefs or is she supported by the likes of Blair and Soros ? She could prove her 'honesty' by having a by election, that way we could tell and the people of Totnes could have a Peoples Vote !
- John

Oh dear, careful what you wish for Kippers.(No point in calling you Tories anymore.) Again the reaction is to prioritize the party rather than the national interest. Whatever way people voted, few envisaged the situation we find ourselves in, much less clowns like Rees-Mogg holding the political balance of power. I suspect you will find very broad support for Sarah Wollaston right across the constituency and some hapless candidate parachuted in from central office being defeated.
- Paul

Dear Sarah...many of the comments above fall into the category of “don’t confuse me with the facts”, they prefer to cling to ideology rather than evaluate and consider the options, as you have. Incapable of real thought, they cling to the sinking ship. Thank you for the work you have done, please accept my best wishes for your future....Rory O'Connor
- Rory O'Connor

Well said Sarah. As an expat living in France we are so uncertain of our future status. Just over a month to go and nobody knows what is happening. Revoke article 50 rather than a no deal situation. This whole business is getting more out of control by the day.
- Jayne Taplin

Thank you Sarah for standing up for what is right, and representing the best interests of your constituents - despite the protestations of the rabid Brextremists. I have only just moved into the area from Swindon, where the Honda exit will devastate a town which is already struggling, with a dying town centre. I am also working on several projects to improve our house, and am finding almost all of the trades I need are available immediately because work has dried up for them. They are seeing the true cost of Brexit already - lack of confidence, people battening down the hatches to try and stay 'safe', rising prices because of how weak the pound has become. Almost everywhere I speak with people about Brexit, I'm finding people who have changed their minds since the 2016 lies have been exposed for what they are. Above all, the young, the people who didn't get a chance to vote for their futures, will almost exclusively vote for remain if we can get the second referendum that is so desperately needed.
- Neil

Thank you for doing the right thing, you Three who have resigned give me hope ,!
- Anne

You’ve been a disgrace to your party and your voters, ever since you changed your mind from wanting to leave to wanting to remain, and weakening Theresa’s position from the start of the negotiations along with Soubry and others. Maybe we didn’t know the full effects of leaving the EU either good or bad, but the people voted for it, MP’s from all parties should respect that, as a matter of democracy. I voted for you as my Conservative representative, you are not that anymore, do the decent and honest thing , call a by-election and stand as whatever you now see yourself, I truly wish WE could have the opportunity to let you see how dissatisfied the constituents are.. Nice to see you laughing and smiling with Soubry on the National news, how CRASS, you have done the good people of this great country, irreparable damage. Peter M
- Petermulloy

In the 2017 election I put my cross against: 'Wollaston. Sarah, The Conservative Party'. She has now stolen my vote, my representative is no more; what say you Sarah ?
- John

As you were voted in as the Conservative candidate, do you believe you should be collecting a salary expenses as you are not fulfilling the job for which we elected you? Surely the honest and democratic thing to do would be to resign completely, call a by-election, not really honest to take money under false pretences is it? I’m sure no one voted for you to vote with Corbyn or sit on his side of the house
- Petermulloy

Petermulloy (and others wanting a By-Election) You voted for Sarah, you won. Get Over It. Second Votes are - according to the Brextremists - undemocratic. I want a second vote on Europe so that people can vote based on truth not lies, but your ilk don't want that because you are now obviously in the minority.
- Neil

So, all the critics expect Sarah to be un-thinking Lobby-fodder for a PM who is being held to ransom by the ERG and DUP. Great idea!! I take the point about defection from the party under whose banner she was elected - BUT do we really want our MPs to blindly follow "The Party" irrespective of the evidence in front of them? The reality is no-one really knows what a no-deal Brexit will entail, but we do know that everyone (ERG included) agree that it will be bad news to some extent. However, the ERG have a "price worth paying" mentality - try telling that to my family who work in areas dependent on free flow of materials and goods across the channel every day. They are the ones who will pay the price, not the ERG and their fellow-thinkers.
- John2

I wasn't sure why she was nicknamed Slippery Sarah until I discovered that she supported a Bill to make MPs, that left their party, should have to fight a By-Election. What hypocrisy !
- John

For those who doubt John’s comment above, the bill in question was put forward by Chis Skidmore in 2011 and sponsored/supported by Dr Sarah Wollaston – google it, it is clear and unambiguous – an MP “who crosses the floor, or ‘defects’, should trigger an automatic by-election so their constituents can have a final say on their decision”. This goes to the heart of why our politics are broken – MPs are acting in their own interests and ignoring the wishes of the majority. Maybe democracy was always a sham and this has made it clear to all. I understand that a significant number on here and in the wider country wish to Remain and for some it seems it doesn’t matter what the cost is and how it is achieved – maybe setting a very dangerous precedent. The ‘Politics of Fear’ has gone into overdrive over the last couple of years; people who disagree are ‘stupid’, ‘old’, ‘right wing’, ‘fascist’ or even worse. The original ‘Leave’ majority are being bullied into submission and won’t even be offered a real choice to leave if/when there is a ‘People Vote’. I really do worry, not for now, but for the future as we are forced to follow the path of ever closer EU union – politically, financially, monetary, legally and military – as this must happen for the EU dream to survive and we are unlikely to get another say in our lifetimes. Previous examples of this sort of power base in history are not looked back in good light – e.g. the breakup of the USSR, more recently the former Yugoslavia etc. or even further back there are many examples of uprisings against empires – some very close to home!!
- Patrick, Brixham

Patrick. 'MPs are acting in their own interests and ignoring the wishes of the majority'. Yes but why ? Certainly some hope to make a buck or two by keeping the status quo ! By far the majority are those who actually start to believe they are superior beings and know better than the rest of us, justifying dispensing with democracy. That of course is nonsense, if true they would mostly all agree, which they don't. They work in a convenient little club with pay and conditions others can only dream of. Both Left and Right feel more akin than with mere mortals. I have known many MPs who would not 'cut it' inthe real world, some who are quite able. Those who are the most contemptible are like 'our Sarah' who feel so superior that they can do complete about turns without having to test their views with their constituents !
- John

ps. now that she has left the Conservative party and joined a company, who is Sarah W answerable to ? Cannot be the electorate, she has disenfranchised them, yet we still pay her wages !
- John

Thank you to those MPs who reject tribalism and extremes both of which so often seem to bring out the worst in society and politics
- Tim

I voted for the candidate not the party so I do hope that Sarah continues to be my MP.
- Pat

I see that a pro Israel lobbyist claims he is funding Sarah's new group; what is going on when a foreign power is trying to influence our Parliament ?
- John

I am used to the cliches, the idiocies, the falsehoods, the unfounded assertions and the dishonesty that fill all the diatribes of the Remainers, so when Dr Wallaston makes her pitch to justify her action one is not at all surprised. I might ask her for a medical opinion but her understanding and knowledge of economics, politics, democracy and the EU is so limited, so crass, so, dare I say it, populist, that one could not trust her with any decision. If things were left to her, we would never get a say on anything major - we are all (in her view and those of her fellow travellers) too stupid, too uneducated, too ignorant to understand the big issues which only she and her ilk understand. It would be laughable if it were not so disastrous for this country. Test your opinions, Dr Wallaston, resign your seat, and stand as a brave new independent committed to EU membership no matter what. Or just be laughed at.
- Jos

I don't think MPs living in the bubble of Westminster have the faintest idea how much their ongoing betrayal of our country and the electorate is going down in this country. If Brexit is not delivered, with or without Theresa May's rotten deal there will be serious trouble in this country and I personally will cannot see myself voting for ANY of the mainstream political parties again in a national election. As for those advocating a second referendum I would say the first one must be honoured or such a thing is totally WORTHLESS!
- David H

Leaving aside Dr Wollaston's disingenuous and misleading comments on Nissan/UK, I just emailed her again, thus: Dear Dr Wollaston, I note your contribution to Parlieamentary debate: Exiting the European Union (11 Mar 2019) https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2019-03-11a.127.0&s=speaker:24761#g149.5 Sarah Wollaston: Even if this monumental fudge is enough to satisfy the ERG and just about manages to scrape through the House tomorrow, what happens next if it is not ratified by the European Parliament? I must point out that our PM does not merely have to "satisfy the ERG" but meet her obligations to the 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EU - the figure in England, with 85% of the UK population, was of course 53% Leave, and in your constituency the figure was 56%... The Brussels WA, drawn up in and by Brussels then handed to May to be rubber stamped by (they imagined) a supine Parliament, is truly shameful and could not be acceded to by any country with a vestige of national pride or a sense of its best interests. Your view differs, of course. One wonders why you have not resigned, and why a byelection is not yet due in Totnes.
- Anthony Harrison

I agree Anthony. Why does Sarah wollaston not resign? She is no longer a Conservative MP so I dont understand. If you resign from a company, you don't get to continue to draw a salary from it! Won't vote for her again. She has cast aside democracy in favour of her personal virws. That is disgraceful.
- Jane devon

Not going too well for Sarah and her cohorts, I'm glad to say. I conclude that she's in a rarified atmosphere and 'doesn't know that she doesn't know !
- John

Sarah is right to make a stand Remember she really does care - as she has shown for working for us all - and is not in Parliament for personal gain / which is more than can be said for others. I like, a lot of people, are so very grateful for her hard work often quietly, caring and very much behind the scenes! I am so glad she looks after us and my area. Brexit is so much of a shambles with so many views and opinions and ideas - With no clear view of which is the best result for the UK. We will not know what is right way forward for many many years! Who can say Sarah is wrong? We don’t! We need to move in a way that causes least damage to UK Crashing out on WTO is not the way.
- Richard H

Post a comment

19 JAN 2019

Brexit and Confidence

I voted against the PM's Brexit deal on Tuesday not only because of concerns about the Withdrawal Agreement itself but because the accompanying political declaration on the Future Framework delivered nothing but uncertainty and the prospect of years of wrangling to come. The scale of the government defeat has made it absolutely clear that this deal cannot pass the House of Commons. It is not just a matter of a few tweaks, the Deal fundamentally pleased neither remainers nor the majority of those who had campaigned for leave.

Far from being the easiest deal in history, the reality was always going to be that compromises and trade offs would be necessary during negotiations. Brexit reality is very far from the sunlit uplands promised during the campaign.

Parliament has reached a complete impasse and I do not believe there will be a majority for any of the alternative proposals and least of all for leaving with no deal at all. In the meantime the days are counting down to March 29th and we risk falling into a chaotic No Deal Brexit unless an alternative is in place. No responsible government could knowingly and deliberately allow that to happen given the serious real world harm to individuals, communities and our economy. The term 'clean Brexit' is a misnomer, it would leave a great deal of avoidable misery for too many of our fellow citizens. No doubt the comfortably off leaders of the Leave campaign would be fine but the economic fallout would hit the poorest the hardest. It has taken a decade to recover from the effects of the 2008 crash and that involved many tough choices about government spending. I want to see an end to austerity, not see us deliberately crashing out with no deal and putting that recovery in jeopardy.

I believe that the only alternative way out of this mess will be to seek an extension of Article 50 and a People's Vote.

My feeling is that a People's Vote should at least include the only negotiated deal as well as an option to remain. I know many people would also like to see No Deal included. The Electoral Commission would advise and Parliament would debate and decide on the question if a decision was made to go ahead with a Referendum Bill. The following report from the Constitution Unit at University College London on the mechanics of a referendum sets out the mechanics of organising a referendum and how this could be achieved in far less than a year https://www.ucl.ac.uk/constitution-unit/sites/constitution-unit/files/the_mechanics_of_a_further_referendum_on_brexit_-_constitution_unit_report_183_revised.pdf

Due to a recent amendment which I supported, the PM must now announce her next steps on Monday, rather than having 21 days as she would otherwise have been able to do. Reports are that the government is now in listening mode but I struggle to see any changes to the Deal that would unite enough backbenchers and secondly be approved by the EU to see it succeed. Others a pushing for a Norway Style deal which would allow us to continue membership of the Single Market, alongside a customs arrangement. This would be the softest type of Brexit and whilst far less economically damaging than No Deal, would again run into the problem of pleasing neither remainers nor leavers. It is likely that many leave campaigners would find it even less acceptable than the PM's Deal given that so called 'Norway plus' would prevent an independent trade policy and see the continuation of free movement of people.

I think it is unlikely that the Commons will agree a compromise that the majority of MPs can support and I would only agree to back Norway Plus if the public were also given the opportunity to weigh up its risks and benefits and have the final say.

I am working with colleagues from Parties across both sides of the Commons to bring an amendment in support of a People's Vote.

I realise that Brexit remains a highly contentious issue and I hear passionate views from both sides of the argument.

I supported the government in the confidence vote on Wednesday and I do not think this lies in contradiction with my vote against the Brexit deal the day before. A general election will not resolve the single most contentious issue before us because these are never fought on a single issue.

I believe that a People's vote would allow us to move forward together with confidence that the nation had given its consent based on the facts and Brexit reality rather than unrealistic promises. It is now over two years since the original referendum, longer than the period between our two most recent general elections and it is nonsense fo some to suggest it is somehow anti democratic to allow people to change their minds and express a democratic opinion. I fully accept that the result could be the same but it would at least be a settled decision based on all the facts and we could finally move forward together rather than tearing ourselves apart.


In a way Parliament currently reflects the confusion and disagreements within the electorate so in one sense it is being democratic. Given there are so many different views how many options would there be on a ballot paper in a People's vote? And would it be a simple majority again? We seem to be heading to a situation where there is no majority for any option and whatever happens now the public are a) losing faith in our politicians b) destined to be very unhappy and divided. All very sad.
- Howard

I agree with what you've said Sarah as I realise what a mess the country is in although I will find that I am so angry at conservatives for doing this to the country in the first place. This is without a doubt the result of money interfering with normal democracy and to think our parliament trundled along and accepted all this and now does nothing to investigate and repair its broken system scares the living daylights out of me. We need to agree on something that will not hurt the people or does the least damage possible. I'd prefer a peoples vote but the amount of money being thrown at leave from outside UK is already paying for a massive campaign against the EU and the lies are unbelievable, todays Telegraph saying remain have had ads campaign all the time in facebook paid by Soros is complete rubbish but no doubt leavers will believe it. If I could quite frankly I would leave UK now and go live in Europe a bigoted right wing Britain is not somewhere I ever imagined finding myself. Overall feeling though is anger at our government, in representing leave and declaring "the will of the people" rubbish it is feeding the decline. WE are the people too and right now we are the majority who wish to remain and not be hurt by this our children's futures are at stake here to. MP's telling untruths and not being called out for them, media continually spinning the truth and 90% percent of the press controlled by those who would do this is a nightmare which if allowed to go on will destroy our economy, set people against people in the country and will not end well. It is alright for all those who have their millions and sit their on the back benches spouting utter nonsense, but all of us ordinary people are feeling the results of this and I can assure you it is not pleasant. The EU has offered us peace, stability, safety, economic benefits and opportunities that previously was only available to the wealthy with freedom of movement. Together we are a force that matter in world politics and business. To turn on them in this way is horrid and frankly unacceptable. I think you are in the wrong party now, as the conservatives cannot survive this either way, people will never trust you again and if money can buy you all so easily you are not worth having as representatives in parliament anyway. This is not personal against you but many others in your party do have a lot to answer for. Mr Corbyn is another matter his beliefs have driven him to where he sits now uncomfortably on the fence, however how he ever came to be leader is for another time. I hope you and the sensible ones in all parties separate so we can get behind you all and sort the mess as well as we can. I shall however always be remain fully in EU because I believe in being together as one voice peacefully.
- Carolanne

Sir John Major in his article on 13th January last cites the need to revoke Article 50. I am in total agreement with that. It has to be a precursor. His article I feel is very well reasoned and shows a lot of wisdom. It should be widely read and considered, especially by our MP who needs the desperate help we all need right now.
- David Burrell

As well as being dishonest, Wollaston is just not bright enough to be an MP. Witness this line at the start of her incoherent post: "...the reality was always going to be that compromises and trade offs would be necessary during negotiations. Brexit reality is very far from the sunlit uplands promised during the campaign". The first sentence is literally contradicted by the second sentence. If there were always going to be "trade offs", then when people made their choice, they were not voting for "the sunny uplands promised". They made a choice in the knowledge "that compromises and trade offs would be necessary". Unless she is suggesting that the people did not know this. In which case, if she believes that the little people were too stupid to make such a decision, why did she support the government in offering a referendum and promise to respect the outcome? Remainers lost because their case was and is incoherent. Now they claim May's deal is bad, but in the same breath say "there is no such thing as a good Brexit". Thus we have to stay in the EU. Then why did they support having a referendum? Because they (the political establishment) thought they could trick and intimidate the little people into voting the way of the establishment...and when the little people didn't follow the government funded propaganda, they simply didn't know what to do. Now the elite claim..."well, we tried, but it's not possible...sorry!". when in really they didn't try to get a good deal, and worked from the day after the referendum to make the process as difficult as possible. Almost the definition of political sabotage. Then they claim "abuse", because some people (having watched our political elite try to rob them of their democratic choice) yell nasty stuff at some of the worst culprits. Well if the political elite think that such a transparently stupid attempt to dupe the people will wash, and continue to thwart the choice made by the British people in June 2016, history tells us that it ends badly for them. It's two years since the last "People's Vote" in Totnes, and circumstances have obviously changed. Sarah should resign her seat, follow her heart to the Lib Dems, and allow the people of Totnes to give "informed consent" to her continuing as our MP.
- George, Paignton

Sorry, in my comment I meant PM, not MP - however, here is a quote from Sir John’s article: I would therefore suggest that, while there remains no consensus in parliament about how best to proceed, the government should, without delay: ● Ask parliament to rescind the European Union (Withdrawal) Act; ● Withdraw the article 50 notification; ● Establish a national consultation process; ● Agree “headline” points on our future relationship with the EU and put that outcome to a binding referendum, with the option of maintaining the status quo. The binding nature of this should be enforced by the confirmation from each party leader that the outcome of this further referendum would be definitive. Only this will provide voters with the facts and reassurance they need to reach a final decision on where best our country’s future — and their own personal future — lies.
- David Burrell

It is perfectly reasonable for the people to have the final say via a 2nd referendum, and it must not be denied, if we are to start healing division. And George from Paignton, attacking personalities is the gutter end of argument. It's not helpful. There are rumours of another GE...how come we can have a another GE, but a second referendum is denied? Blows the "will of the people nonsense" that's for sure. I've attach a quote from the Washington Post recording how low we have fallen. "Brexit has been a catastrophic political failure. This messy, unpopular deal, the most unpopular government policy that anybody can remember, was produced by a political class that turned out to be ignorant — about Europe, Europeans, trade arrangements, institutions — and arrogant, disdaining knowledge and expertise. It was the work of leaders who favoured identity politics over economics, who preferred an undefined notion of “sovereignty” to the real institutions that gave Britain influence and power, who believed in fantasies and scorned reality." Anne Applebaum. Washington Post
- richard

I think Sarah Wollaston has made her position clear and what a shabby one it is. Smoke and mirrors, muddying the waters and weasel words are her forte. The fact that Parliament cannot agree to proceed with Brexit in no way justifies another referendum until the first is implemented. It suggests that Parliament has a majority of Remainers trying various ways to subvert a result they disagree with. The people of this country understand the meaning of 'fair play' and won't be fooled by such disgraceful behaviour. Parliament voted overwhelmingly to leave on 29th March with either a deal or on WTO terms, now a stalement has been engineered in an attempt to reverse the people's decision. Unless the result is respected I believe the Conservatives will lose the next election with Remainer MPs voted out and jolly good to. Time to send in our letters to Totnes Conservative Assoc. asking for a trustworthy candidate !
- John

John, I merely suggested that her constant flip-flopping on this issue (remember that for most of the campaign she WAS a Brexiteer) and regular. It is not the gutter to suggest that Wollaston is dishonest, lacks judgement and lacks intelligence...it's evident for all to see. "How come we can have a another GE, but a second referendum is denied". That would be because we have not left the EU yet you see? The logic of your argument would be that we should have a another General Election before a government could actually take office. As for Anne Applebaum...well not really the honest impartial international arbiter you portray her as is she? She is the wife of Radoslaw Sikorski. He is a former candidate for the post of EU High Representative and well known Brussels sycophant...he obviously aspires to higher political office with the Brussels kleptocracy, and his wife is doing an excellent job of peddling their line. Usually with the EU, you really just have to join the dots to see what the connection is to the gravy train. No wonder no trusts the mainstream media and our political establishment, when so many of them have their snouts in the trough.
- George, Paignton

George you are obviously losing the arguments when you have to resort to personal insults against Dr Wollaston. We know your opinions and can see through them. What we need to do now is to find a way out of this mess that Cameron dropped us into. Just being rude won't help at all.
- Bob

Bob, the mess is a result of the majority of Parliament being Remainers who are trying to subvert the democratic process by various means ! I voted Leave: Having negotiated with the EU at Commission level and have a relative in a senior position; I am left with the inescapable view that the EU is a corrupt, self serving organization. The EU will not be happy until parity is achieved between the pieces of land formerly known as nations. If that requires reducing the UK economy to the level of states recovering from years behind the Iron Curtain, then that is what they will attempt !
- John

Bob, the argument finished for most people on 23 June 2016. You haven't addressed any point I have ever made in correspondence with you, so you are not so much losing an argument as avoiding it on the grounds you are out of your depth. I won't respond to you again because you never make any sensible or relevant point.
- George, Paignton

If the argument finished in 2016 why are we still having it now. The PM's deal was voted down. The commons is split. The country is split. The tory party is split. I will say it again, we need to find a way out of this mess. No deal will be a disaster, if we try to fight with the big boys in the WTO playground we will get thrashed. Our services sector will suffer ( Look at Rees Mogg - he has opened a Dublin office to keep his access to the EU. There is a vote of confidence in the future) Where do we go from here? I will say it again, if the brexiteers are so confident of their position, why not confirm it with another vote?
- Bob

I really do not know how to reply or whether I should try! Your dramatisations - crash out, chaotic, apparent reliance on hearsay, end to austerity, etc. - demonstrate a tremendous lack of thought. And your patronising remarks about comfortably off leaders of the Leave campaign are beyond the pale when one reads that the current Leave lobbying, being organised by the likes of Mandelson and Roland Rudd, is funded by no less than George Soros. If you are so convinced about the damage a clean Brexit will do, which is what you so stridently claim, where is your supporting analysis? I spent an hour or so recently listening to Hilary Benn’s EUExit Select Committee putting questions to Chris Heaton-Morris, Minister responsible for no-deal preparations. His evidence as to our preparedness for the short term issues that might arise with a whole range of EU goods, perishable foodstuffs, pharma supplies, etc., was most reassuring. It is worth noting the relevance of Mr Heaton-Morris’s background. Before politics including a spell as an MEP, he ran a family business at Covent Market importing perishable foods from around the world including from the EU. He foresees few no-deal problems beyond a short period of adjustment. Elsewhere it is easy enough to access official reports indicating arrangements are in place for other no-deal issues that must be addressed – Euratom, airline over-flights, etc. As to your suggestion that a so-called people’s vote should involve just two questions: remain or the May deal that Parliament overwhelmingly voted down? Well who would accept that as a fair proposition, who would not see through that sort of gerrymandering? The Conservative manifesto that you presumably supported in 2017 ruled out joining the single market and customs union, which rules out a Norway type solution, which essentially rules out anything softer than Mrs May’s deal, which in turn has been rejected by Parliament. So what was wrong with the proposals offered up by David Davis, that Michel Barnier was reported to have been working toward - based on a free trade agreement such as the one signed with Canada. You should consider very, very carefully the consequences of a re-run: the horrendous ructions in the event of a slim Remain 51:49 win - a real possibility - polling continues to show opinion is as divided as it has always been. Everyone favours a good trade deal but few political union. Take a step back and think how the two separate issues of UK’s relationship with Europe, trade and sovereignty have developed. In the 60s the cry was for the UK to modernise: we were being left behind in the wake of the post-war US funded German economic miracle. Membership of the EEC trading bloc was the answer. But there were many Labour and Conservative voices warning that loss of sovereignty would be the eventual outcome. For most EU countries memories of invasion, atrocity and dictatorship are recent and raw. To prevent a return of such instability they have been increasingly ready to hand over national sovereignty to a relatively benign centralising, but in the British experience, authoritarian power. Mikhail Gorbachev went as far as to say the EU is simply the old Soviet Union dressed in Western clothes. De Gaulle said membership of the EEC would be difficult for the UK, we have always been reluctant to sign up to anything beyond a trade deal, we got Euro and Schengen opt outs. Cameron failed on immigration and proposed a two-speed Europe. For centuries, unlike mainland Europeans, we British have enjoyed the unbroken benefits of being a sovereign people - up until the recent, difficult decades that is. All Brexiteers want is a good trade deal. Reluctant Remainers want the same but worry about the mechanics of leaving. Together they make up a big majority for bringing back control. Parliament does not get this and wants to retrieve sovereignty from the people, abdicate and return control to Europe. What we need is a Parliament which represents and is able to implement the clear will of the people.
- Stephen, Totnes

Very well put Stephen – clearly researched and well written. Your first sentence sums up my exasperation with the situation – I have been shouted down on more than one occasion for not listening but I, like you, do take the time to understand what lies behind the headlines. A story in the BBC no less (hardly biased towards the Leave argument) that people may be interested in - https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-46908205. For me, this is not an economic argument (although I do not buy into the crash out, chaotic, end of life as we know it rhetoric) but one of where our future lies. Remain is not the status quo as some people would argue – the EU is on a course for ‘Ever Closer Union’ – fiscal, political, military etc. – and, if you believe the report above, primarily driven by France and Germany. Do we climb on board all-in and follow along or do we seek to free ourselves to choose our own direction?
- Patrick, Brixham


I am sick to death of the antics of remainer MPs who are deliberately taking every opportunity to wreck our chances of leaving the EU on acceptable terms. Leave means just that, it does NOT mean remaining in a customs union! Those warning of serious electoral consequences if Brexit is hijacked are right to do so. I am no extremist and I am certainly not a racist either, but if the leave vote is not respected I cannot see myself voting for any of the mainstream political parties again. Those working in the political bubble of Westminster and London have no idea how angry ordinary voters like me are getting. Please stop being obstructive and start being constructive, even at this late stage. It will make such a difference . . .
- David H

Sarah Wollaston continues to undermine our party in an attempt thwart the Referendum vote. Could we please have another election for a Conservative MP for Totnes, as clearly we 'did not know what we were voting for'. In the meantime suggest e-mails to the local association voicing our displeasure with the person we elected.
- John

A people's vote is simply a democratic-sounding phrase for requesting a choice between a non-existent or rejected EU agreement and staying in that manipulative organisation. Hardly a fair choice! Woolly thinking! Sadly, influential remainers dismiss the real option with emotive words like catastrophe and cliff-edge - instead of fairly discussing the pros and cons of WTO which we co-founded and UK and EU are members. You are wrong about the poor being worse off - price of basics like food, clothing, textiles can actually fall after Brexit, not rise, by becoming independent and reducing our tariffs. Just read the assessment by lawyers and ex-judges which followed the forced publication of the government's legal advice. It's conclusion? The positive advantages of leaving the EU without a trade agreement and without a withdrawal or transition agreement are enormous. Given the lack of EU cooperation, it is the only way forward which fulfills the decision of the British people to leave the EU. It hands back control and it leads to huge economic benefits. https://lawyersforbritain.org/leaving-the-eu-on-wto-terms-pulling-down-the-barriers-to-world-trade
- David Hopkins

The Prime Minister on Monday repeatedly made the point, that without agreeing her deal, trying to extend the Article 50 period only delays a ‘No Deal’ and needs agreement of all the other EU members, but revoking Article 50 doesn’t need that and prevents a ‘No Deal’ implementation. Parliament can discuss that via Amendments to her neutral motion next week. I was just wondering whether you think she was confident that no-one would be bold enough to do that and hence was able to float the idea more than once?

A no-deal outcome would be so appalling for the Brixham fishing community, and yet the only real way of preventing this as we run out of time is to table an amendment for an agreement to revoke Article 50, and yet I understand you have had to pull your amendment to extend the period, due to lack of support. It seems tragic that our fishermen could lose their livelihoods because so much of their trade with the EU would be blocked by headstrong French fishermen retaliating against the loss of their fishing in our waters. Not the rosy future our guys thought they were voting for. They have been mislead, but the only way to stop it immediately is to revoke Article 50, but no-one is bold enough to do that.

DTR- As independent coastal state, the UK will have the opportunity to move towards a fairer share of fishing opportunities - overhauling the current system where UK fishermen have received a poor deal that is based on fishing patterns from the 1970s. EU Member States currently land around eight times as much fish in UK waters than the UK does in EU Member States’ waters. The UK proposes a suite of measures to improve the sustainability of the fishing industry, supporting the next generation of fishermen while protecting our precious marine environment. Prime Minister Theresa May said: As an island nation our fishing industry is the lifeblood of coastal communities around the UK. I have been clear that when we leave the EU we will take back control of our waters. The plans set out today demonstrate the bright future in store as we build a UK fishing industry for future generations.
- John

Having read an article in New Statesman about the pros and cons of a no deal exit's impact on fishing ( https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/economy/2018/09/end-black-gold-how-no-deal-brexit-could-backfire-britain-s-fishermen ) and noting that such a respected local authority such as Jim Portus is highlighting the potential problems with exporting fish to the Continent, I do wonder whether things can really improve in that scenario. The bit about lack of patrol vessels also raises the question of how much the government really wants to take control of uK waters anyway!
- Francis South Brent

Clueless fickle woman. We had the arguments BEFORE the referendum. In fact REMAIN told most of the lies.
- Stu

I suppose it's too much to expect that Sarah Wollaston will not vote in a way that frustrates the 2016 Democratic Peoples Referendum. At least she could do the decent thing and abstain or resign !
- John

Dr Wollaston. You have tweeted about Sir James Dyson saying that he will go offshore. You may not have noticed but he paid £176m in taxes according to the Sunday Times. Also you are factually incorrect as what he is doing is setting up Interlectual Propert Rights (IP) in Singapore in relation to a venture to build electric cars for the Asian markets especially China. That is massively expensive and will require enormous investment most of which will come from the Far East. His IP for vacuum cleaners will remain in UK incurring UK tax. Also he is opening a College in Hullavington to build on his dream of creating more engineers for the UK. Leaving the EU still not change anything for his Company - remember most of the World trade is not European. Only 10% of global GDP. I think an apology is in order. At least try not to become as bad as other remainders and Brexiteers who are resorting to arguments better left in the playground. Be nice to have a few politicians who actually understand business and inport/exports. Try talking with James Dyson and you may learn something. Guess it won't change your mind but it may at least get you to see the realities on international trade.
- Andy

And so it continues. I was naive enough to think that this big push to remove ‘No Deal’ option was just because politicians had no idea how to negotiate – i.e. just when we are starting to see a little movement in some of the EU position, they want to remove our main (only real) bargaining chip! But then I realised, this has nothing to do with removing ‘No Deal’ but everything to do with stopping us leaving the EU. Just as the ‘Peoples Vote’ is nothing to do with democracy but everything to do with staying in the EU. Not surprised that you can’t get support for the ‘Peoples Vote’ – even politicians are realising that if you ask again (with a ‘fair’ question) the margin to leave could be even greater – no wonder you can’t get support for this. Stop the democratically voted for will of the people if you wish – but don’t be surprised at the consequences to the make-up of our Parliament in the years to come!
- Patrick, Brixham

No one can quantify Brexit or no Brexit as the future is unquantifiable and to continue suggesting otherwise is ridiculous. The future paths that we individually or collectively choose to travel will bring us to different futures. One and all will never know the outcome of a future unchosen as this path will never be known to anyone. This is the dilemma we face individually and collectively and no one can promise a certain outcome of any unknown paths that may be chosen. Therefore to Brexit or not to Brexit remains guesswork as both paths have potential to be fraught with difficulties,both paths could equally prove beneficial to the country. Who knows these answers?No one. And he who says he knows is a snake, a confidence trickster.
- Derek

True Derek, but we can at least see the direction in which the EU is going. Last week Junker said we must remove nation states in favour of a federation ! Sarah Wollaston has been in overdrive with 'project fear' and as you say, cannot actually lnow. Now that a second referendum is less likely it will be interesting to see what tricks she gets up to. Thanks to her, Soubrey, Grieve etc the Government have been hamstrung, contributing to the present difficult situation. What will it take for her to jump ship before being pushed ?
- John

Just received this from Government today. SW clearly does not respect the referendum result and democracy and will do anything to try and reverse the result. The Government’s policy is not to revoke the Article 50 notice. The British people gave a clear instruction to leave and we are delivering on that instruction. In 2016, almost three quarters of the electorate took part in the referendum and 17.4 million people voted to leave the European Union. This is the highest number of votes cast for anything in UK electoral history and the biggest democratic mandate for a course of action ever directed at any UK Government. In 2017’s General Election, over 80% of people then also voted for parties committing to respect the result of the referendum - it was the stated policy of both major parties that the decision of the people would be respected. The Government is clear that it is now its duty to implement the will expressed by the electorate in the referendum. The British people must be able to trust in its Government both to effect their will, and to deliver the best outcome for them. As the Prime Minister has said: “This is about more than the decision to leave the EU; it is about whether the public can trust their politicians to put in place the decision they took.” We recognise that to do otherwise would be to undermine the decision of the British people, and to disrespect the powerful democratic values of this country and this Government. To revoke the Article 50 notice would go against the referendum result and is not a course of action the Government feels we should take. The Government continues to be committed to delivering on the instruction given to us by the British people; working to overcome the challenges and seize the opportunities this brings to deliver an outcome which betters the lives of British people - whether they voted to Leave or to Remain. In doing so, we will honour the mandate of the British people and leave the European Union in a way which benefits every part of our United Kingdom and every citizen of our country. Whilst we note the judgment in the recent Wightman litigation, the Government's policy is not to revoke the Article 50 notice. Department for Exiting the European Union
- Fred Paignton

First trick of SW is a 10 minute bill, certain to fail. Please do the decent thing, resign, stand as an Independant; we deserve another 'Totnes People's Vote'.
- John

PS. Just seen Sarah on the Politics program. If the Conservative party follows a Brexit course she disagrees with, she'll resign the whip and stand as an Independent at the next election. I have to ask, why wait ?
- John

John and others here. What do you make of having to Bribe the DUP to support her views and today learn TM wants to offer extra payments ( read Bribes - as that is what it is ) to Labour constituencies to ensure the6 vote for her Deal . Is bribery not illegal , and made illegal by the Tories . A party i used to vote for before they ripped the guts out of our self respect and effectively spat in the face of our neighbours . Surely these bribes are not only illegal but unecessary . I alos question whether 17 miloin of the whole country is genuinely sufficinet to wreak a country . Do you fear a Second , more genuinely informed Referendum ?
- G david

Thank you for your continuing tenacious efforts to apply some critical thinking to Brexit, and for reaching out across the party devide to try and prevent no-deal’. The sight of 317 MPs waving order papers and cheering the utterly meaningless Brady-Malthouse amendment, and then abrogating responsibility by voting down the Cooper-Grieve amendment must have been a bitter disappointment. For me it was one of the low points of a dismal 2 years in which 40 or 50 Brexit fanatics seem determined to lead the country to sever all connections to the EU, wharever the cost to Ireland, the Union, or the Economy, and then in the same breath talk about a wide-ranging FTA. It is surreal to think that a 52-48 in-out referendum 2 years ago gives licence for this utter shambles, and it is depressing that so many MPs are acting like so many rabbits frozen in the headlights. As a country we seem to have lost a sense of proportion. Please don’t give up, although there will undoubtedly be critics, there are many who hope like me that you continue your efforts on our behalf with like-minded colleagues to reverse a chaotic Brexit.
- Bob

G david & Bob, I`ll try to answer you both. No I don`t like any form of bribery. Nor do I like people engaging in a democratic system, losing, then spending over 2 years griping and doing their best to subvert a necessary process. Like it or not we have a majority wins system, keeping to the result is essential in a democracy. Remember that the People and the Queen are Sovereign, not Parliament who are given an administrative roll for 5 years only; any change in the Constitution has to be assented by the People, Parliament doesn`t have that power. It`s because of this that we see MPs trying to frustrate the Will of the People by devious means. We don`t know how things will pan out, too much scaremongering and disinformation. Do not confuse the EU with Europe, the EU makes nothing, sells nothing, just taxes and issues directives. The EU is, I believe, a corrupt, self serving organisation that runs a protectionist racket ! The EU makes it clear that it wants to see the end of Sovereign states, replaced by a Federal system, with an army, unified taxation etc etc. Remember that our Common Law is supreme and does not allow transfer of any governance to a foreign power; if this is done by a statute it is illegal under Common Law. Common Law trumps Statutes, if this were changed we would be in a dictatorship, Hitler tried it !
- John

John, I'm no lawyer but I don't see where the bit about the people and the Queen being sovereign comes from. There isn't a single codified constitution as such but rather a number of sources of laws including Parliament as well as common law but Parliament has the ultimate right to change the law, any law, as it stands. That makes Parliament sovereign by the look of it.
- Francis South brent

Francis: suggest you learn about The British Constitution in relation to Common Law. Parliament can make Acts but not change Common Law; that's why they are Acts of Parliament rather than Laws of Parliament. Politicians would have you believe otherwise for convenience but their power is limited. If you're hauled up in court for breaking an Act and a jury finds you not guilty, the Act fails, the People decide what is acceptable. also Judges are non political and protect the People from despots ! That's just for starters, check it out.
- John

Sorry John, your take on common law doesn't stack up. All the references I look at make clear that common law is the set of laws that have evolved through the years largely through judicial rulings in court cases (= case law). The judicial decision is arrived at through looking at the current precedents set by case law and any Acts of Parliament that apply to the situation. If an Act specifically says something that counters previous precedent then that determines the decision for that case and case law changes as a result. If things didn't work that way we would still have slavery, children working down mines etc.
- Francis South Brent

Francis- read the rest !
- John

FRED it is only the highest number because of population growth. The percentage turning out for general elections in the post war period was higher. As it is the majority, now they have seen the reality, want to remain. More young people have signed up to vote and their choice would reverse the decision if we were allowed to have a confirmatory referendum.
- Ian Bridgwater

Good constituency MP. But not a democrat. The people voted and she has denied their wishes. I was a remained who voted to stay with a heavy heart. But once it was leave me you have to go with the vote. I'm guessing she has never worked in an environment when you go with the majority even if you haven't agreed. She should have and stayed from within the Conservative Party. But I'm guessing she is not really a Conservative Party member at heart. Good luck at the next election. Bye or otherwise as you will lose. As a parting comment: I wouldn't vote UKIP or a Cornyn Labour for that matter if my life depended upon it. The is no purple momentum. Just Conservatives who a tad dissappointed. Good luck back as a medical professional. We need them.
- Andy

Post a comment

09 JAN 2019

Brexit Amendment

Over the past couple of days I have supported a series of amendments to try to reduce the risk of the U.K. crashing out of the EU on March 29th with No Deal. The Government must stop introducing deliberate delays and instead make serious plans for what happens if the Prime Minister's Deal is rejected. As there have been no changes to the legal text of the Withdrawal Agreement, rejection looks to be near certain and we do not have the luxury of time on our side with just 79 days to go until Brexit.

Yesterday I voted for an amendment that will prevent the Government implementing the "no deal" provisions of The Withdrawal Act without the explicit consent of Parliament.

In essence, this was about Parliament making it clear to Government that there is no majority for No Deal. That message was highlighted further during a cross Party meeting between the Prime Minister and over 200 MPs after we had written to set out our deep concerns about the damaging effect of No Deal on individuals, businesses and communities.

Today I supported a further amendment in order to reduce the timeframe for Government to return with its proposals about what should happen next if the Deal is voted down next week. The Government will now have 3 days rather than 21 days to respond.

This matters because of the very serious consequences that would follow if we left the EU in a chaotic manner and the increasing risk of that happening as a result of running out of time for any alternatives.

A majority of MPs won't support No Deal because of both the immediate and longer term damage this would inflict on our economy. The government's own forecasts predict that growth over the next 15 years without a deal would be 9.3% lower than it would otherwise have been on current terms.

WTO rules are not the panacea that some claim, British exports to the EU would be hit by tariffs of around £6bn. The cost of Imports would also be affected, increasing the cost of living in the UK.

There would be serious disruption to complex supply chains hitting many of our key manufacturers and also creating delays to the supplies many products including diagnostic supplies and medicines which are crucial to patients who rely on NHS care. Stockpiling and other No Deal planning costs are already running into billions and the Government could and should prevent this waste by ruling out No Deal.

But the avoidable problems created by No Deal extend beyond this to the major disruption to networks of cooperation in vital areas such as policing, security, research and travel.

We would all be affected and whatever the rhetoric from those who argue for No Deal, Britain would be far poorer, weaker and more isolated. No responsible Government or MP could vote to knowingly and deliberately inflict this on the people they represent. I and many of my colleagues would resign the Conservative whip if it became the Party's stated policy objective.

It is also time for Government to stop presenting this as a simple binary choice between the Prime Minister's deal and No Deal. Parliament has shown and will continue to demonstrate that it is not prepared to accept that.


Sarah thinks she knows better than the little people. I have been enlisting support of fellow Conservative Members in the constituency to organise for the deselection of Mrs Wollaston. From speaking with people on the ground, I can be fairly certain that she will not represent us for long. Either she will be deselected, or the seat will be lost. Looking forward to the next election to get an MP with integrity and intelligence.
- George, Paignton

More project fear from Sarah and her cronies, in the corner of the house. SW is failing to support her party and PM and her behaviour is disgraceful. Using the familiar phrase "crashing out" when she should be promoting immense "opportunities" afforded by Brexit. I`m pretty sure SW voted for the referendum but as the result did not go her way she is trying to reverse Brexit. I`m pretty sure SW also voted for the withdrawal bill which means the deal is WTO terms if no deal agreed with EU. If TM`s deal is rejected the other deal on the table is the default WTO deal which would suit us fine if only the back stabbing MP`s would get on and implement the will of the majority of the British people. I knew what I was voting for , not sure if SW has been so sure.
- Fred.

Well done Sarah. You are one of the true brave 17 Tory heroes on the Grieve amendment standing up for everyone. Allen, Boles, Clarke, Djanogly, Greening, Grieve, Gyimah, Johnson, Lee, Letwin, Mitchell, Morgan, Neill, Sandbach, Soubry, Vaizey, Wollaston. If the Tories want to remain the party of Government, our next PM will be from this group. If not, the Tories will be utterly hammered in the polls, and become a UKIP shell.
- Richard

Agree completely with George. She should be deselected from this constituency before the next election. I for one, a Conservative voter all my life, will NOT vote for her again. Her energies put into local issues are pathetic, compared to the time she has used making trouble for the PM and paving the way for Corbyn.
- Cindy

Clearly Sarah Wollaston does not understand her role in a representative democracy. After a Referendum and General Election where a simple 'Leave' was the result and her party stood on a manifesto of implementing the result, she had only 2 choices, support her party or abstain. Instead we hear weasel words and attempts to undermine a democratic vote and her party at every possible opportunity. Yes she is entitled to have personal views that conflict with the results but not to act as she has. Like the rest of us she had one vote, by doing so she accepts the result, even if she dislikes it; 'Losers Consent'. The honourable thing would be for her to resign, possibly too much to expect; count me in George.
- John

Thank you Sarah for your brave stance on this - I am heartened by your common sense in what is swiftly becoming a perilous situation for the nation. No one voted in the referendum for the deal the PM has negotiated and anyone with an eye on the younger generation and their futures will know that No Deal would be an insult to them. Well done for staying level headed and clear thinking and thank you for the work you are doing.
- Angus

John, you spout on about representative democracy, but you clearly do not understand what it means. I refer you to Edmund Burke's address to the electors of Bristol where he makes clear the difference between a representative and a delegate: "Your representative owes you, not his industry only, but his judgment; and he betrays, instead of serving you, if he sacrifices it to your opinion." http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch13s7.html
- Andy

Thank you Sarah for pointing out the folly of leaving with no deal, and all the chaotic consequences that would follow - however we each voted in 2016, surely none of us voted to become poorer, nor did we vote for stockpiling medicines and food and wasting £m's on a ferry company with no ships. If that is an indicator of the Brexit dividend then it reveals the marked absence of planning and foresight with a whiff of corruption
- Sylvia

You have let us all down, what don't you get, I voted Conservative, not for you, you have gone against the Conservative Manifesto, your Constituents, the People of the UK, and DEMOCRACY. Do you agree with one of your gang of 12 Anna Soubry, who declared on the night of the Referendum result, that all the people who voted to leave were mis- guided and stupid? she said the Bank of England would be closed for business by the following Thursday, and catasrophe would ensue. Myself and my family, (not all Leave supporters!!) will support your deselection , we are Conservatives, Join Jeremy and Mo Molam
- peter paignton

Very good Andy, although "spouting on" would be giving your view too much credit. So in that case why did the Conservative Party of which Sarah is a nominal member offer a referendum on the subject, why did the government of the day bother 33 million to vote in the referendum, why did it spend a fortune on the campaign, why did it use its taxpayer-funded propaganda to promise a once in a generation opportunity, why did it promise to implement the people's will and why did the party for which Sarah stood promise to respect the referendum result and withdraw from the Customs Union and Single Market? As for your lecture on Burke...that's your democratic inspiration is it?! No wonder you love the EU. A man who claimed that electing a Head of State was "utterly destructive of the unity, peace and tranquillity of a nation". He added “The road to eminence, and power from obscure condition ought not to be made too easy, nor a thing of much course”. Yes the plebs must know their place! Good luck getting popular support for that thesis! As Tom Paine said, “Immortal power is not a human right, and therefore cannot be a right of parliament”.
- George, Paignton

Almost correct Andy but in this case the 'representatives' gave the decision to the people by way of a referendum. This was necessary as, under the British Constitution, Parliament alone cannot give up any sovereignty without the consent of the 'People'. In other cases a representative is morally bound to 'keep their word' if they were elected having made promises. In relation to Burke, do not confuse 'your opinion' with. 'their promise to you', many a dictator would be otherwise legitimised !
- John





Siv...Caps Locks. Typing in capitals makes you seem like a lunatic. And that's before you even read the tripe you've written. If Sarah wants to stand as an Independent, that could happen tomorrow. She deceived the people of Totnes in 2017, including Tory Party members who worked hard for her, and pretended to support a manifesto she abhorred. She could be honest with everybody and accept that she is no longer a Tory. Resign the whip, resign the seat, and let the people of Totnes decide. She won't do that, because she knows she'd lose. The rest of your message is just a boring dimwitted rehash of the argument you made unsuccessfully in June 2016. You lost then, and after reading that again, no bloody wonder.
- George, Paignton

Shouting will not help. Aim here is to stop Corbryn becoming PM. As for the issues about BREXIT. As a man who voted Remain the issues raised by SIV WHITE are flawed purely because for example, air travel is covered by international agreements out with the EU. Also the German economy amongst others exports more to us then we to them. Scaremonging doesn't help. Can you imagine the effect on Spanish and French farmers if their exports to us were majorly disrupted? Spain has 40% youth unemployment! Also as a net contributor to the EU to a sum of 9 bn not sure what SIV White is on about. Those grants is just our money coming back to us minus the 9 bn. No the issue is the Referendum was lost but our politicians from all sides can't accept it. Cornyn being particularly deceitful as a Bennite leaver without Tony Ben's intelligence. The EU always punishes those who don't play the EU integration game. Even if we stay we will lose our rebate be subject to more tax integration and defence conformity. And having worked in Brussels the EU employs thousands on better expense allowances than we in NATO had. I voted Remain because I knew what would happen.Better an imperfect world. Now we are here it is too late. We cannot go back to the past. Our MP needs to understand that. I will be abstaining during the next election if Dr Wollaston remains as our MP. A shame really as she is good for the South Hams.
- Andy

Sarah - please Ignore George , he is from Paignton. I would be bitter as well in such circumstance. You would think that he could see that this country faces far bugger issues that the white baby boomer gripe of being in the EU
- Rob

Insulting people because of their views "that way madness lies". It is important that everyone sets out their opinions without reverting to rude or mocking taunts or asides. If you resort to verbal attacks you diminish your argument. This is anything but a simple argument. And remember right now the EU is suffering from attacks on many sides including from Italy, Poland, Hungary before we look at the issues around the rise of AfD in Germany. So their negotiating aim has always been to make the heretics suffer, while trying to fend off the issues in the East and rise of nationalism. As the Irish often say " I wouldn't be starting from here" is apt. We are in a mess and I suspect a no deal or extension to Article 50 are the only way forward. Realism is now needed rather than idealism.
- Andy

I agree with George, Sarah should quit the Tory party and and make room for someone who supports the result of the referendum. I have supported the Tory Party all my life but will not support Sarah at the next election. Scare mongering about a no deal won’t work. I worked in the EU prior to us joining and there were No problem flying to or moving between EU states. I would support a campaign to remove Sarah Wollaston as the representative of the South Hams constituency.
- David

This woman and her barmy ideas does NOT represent me or my family. We are all democrats here and expect the people's decision to be honoured. I've never voted for another party but in the absence of a satisfactory alternative I will abstain if Dr W and Mrs May are still in place.
- Michael

Democracy is not a one off. We have general elections regularly, the last one came 2 years after the one before. Lets have a public vote on the brexit deal. As the tory party can't agree if they like it or not, (or even if they like their leader) and the deal will get voted down, the someone has to make a decision. No deal will be a disaster and parliament will never allow it. Let the people take control (remember that slogan "take control") and wecan move on from there.
- Bob

Sarah, if you block the implementation of Brexit in any form, not only will I not vote for you again I will simply never vote again. All trust we had in our demicratic process will evaporate so there will be no point in voting
- Paul

If Conservative MP's such as you pitch Parliament against the people I'm afraid you mustn't be surprised at what happens. I for one shall work for any party that promises a clean Brexit and if that means holding my nose whilst voting UKIP so be it
- Oscar

It's clear that Sarah will most likely lose at the next General Election; after admittedly colluding with the opposition, should she not 'do the right thing' and resign the party whip now ?
- John

Sarah, I voted for you in last election so you could vote for me on Brexit but all you are doing is making a mess of it all. I live in Brixham and used to be a fisherman so I understand about being let down by our government and the European union. We have been fighting for a better deal for years but all that happens is more disappointment and regulation to make it harder for a hard working person to make a honest living, and you not supporting your own voters is disgraceful. Pete
- Pete

Dr Woolleston you are a disgrace. We in Devon voted Out of EU, and you were elected knowing this but you have gone back on your word and your parties manifesto just because you think you know better than anyone else. You are not the only one and the whole of the Members of parliament should be sacked and a new lot who do respect their constituents put in place. I have voted all my life as I feel that it’s right to have a say in this Wonderful Country’s future, but if you and the politicians who are laughably supposed to be there to represent the constituents disregard the Vote to LEAVE then I shall never vote again.
- Elizabeth Dowling

1) The people are sovereign - if you don't accept that then revolution will ensue and the streets will run red. 2) The people delegate their sovereignty to elected representatives who run the country using their own judgement. 3) If enough of us dislike their judgement then we can remove them at the next regular election. 4) Sometimes our representatives are either incapable of making an important decision or consider the issue so important that it must be referred back to the people. 5) Once the people decide according to the rules of the referral the representatives must implement the overall decision or resign. 6) Resigning triggers an election where the issue is effectively voted on again considering all the circumstances and all the views and promises of those standing for election. 7) A sufficient majority voted for leave. And then an election was called which produced a majority of candidates of all parties who either supported leave or who didn't but yet promised to carry out the decision of the first vote. Our sovereignty was thus maintained but if any fight against the first decision and its endorsement, those representatives will be responsible and will suffer the consequence mentioned in (1).
- Jean Xavier

Jean Xavier. In this case your no.6 is void as there is now a EU Withdrawel Act in place and has to be implemented by whoever is in power. (Unless a new Act is created, which would be against the ratified will of the people).
- John

With respect to all, may I share what I feel are Principles, upon which action must be based, that help us all recognise integrity. 1. A Majority of all those who chose to vote, voted Leave 2. As a Democrat I respect that "Majority", so I believe should all MPs. 3. My MP and those for whom others voted and now represent were elected on a Party Policy to "Leave", over 80 percent of the Electorate, if to Remain was your most important issue the Lib Dems were asking for your vote. 4. The date to Leave is set in law at 29th March 2019. 5. All MPs must now vote either on the deal that has taken 2 years to negotiate and which has the support of 27 united EU Members or if no cross Party compromise can be achieved, then with no agreement. Remember how many Labour MPs supported Heath's entry in the first place. For what it's worth I wrote to Sarah asking her to vehemently argue for a cross party negotiating team as we could all see this is not a Party issue it remains decision of the greatest National Interest. Finally, for Remainers like myself, we were actually always "In but Out" and I am sure we will end up "Out but In." All this has done is turn the Conservative Party Inside Out, and now Upside Down. Keep Smiling, and realise how privileged we are to be discussing this with out Bombs and Bullets....well thus far !
- Martin Beck

The referendum vote in 2016 was counted on district councils not parliamentary constituencies (see BBC election night coverage). Sarah's mandate cannot be based on her constituents as in a general election but as an approximate fit to for instance South Hams which in fact voted 52.9% to remain. That aside I'm not quite sure why people are so determined to leave despite the difficulty our 'best' politicians have experienced negotiating and obtaining a deal that pleases anyone. Maybe they didn't try hard enough or it might just be too difficult to extricate our economy from its intricate links with other countries in the time Article 50 allows. Or if a no deal Brexit Is the goal why has there been so little progress negotiating deals with non-EU economies? I think I'd prefer a backup plan if we leave without a deal personally and I don't see one emerging. Those who still fancy crashing out generally have the substantial resources to sustain themselves in the event our economy sees a dip (Jacob Rees Mogg for one) and may even be able to benefit. Or maybe it is just all 'Project Fear' but I'm not confident myself. I'd rather take time to take stock and change my mind if the facts change. Maybe now's the time to reflect on what's been achieved.i is it what the people who voted to leave wanted in 2016?
- Helen

Helen, your post is rather heavy on dodgy logic. In a democracy, where you have a vote amongst opposing views, you will always have disappointed losers. We survive by the losers accepting the result, by voting at all you agree to accept the outcome. The present situation is because Mrs May did not want to leave and was incapable of fulfilling her duty, clear from the fact that she was scheming to undermine her Brexit Minister. Leaving offers so many more opportunities for the country than remaining; within a couple of years it's likely that people will have forgotten they had wanted to remain. The world is comprised of optimists and pessimists, never be led by a pessimist; optimists are the ones that get the prizes !
- John

Thank you Sarah for being outspoken about the consequences of a no deal and for your support for the amendment. I am also encouraged by your support for a second referendum. I find it an affront that when we were given the vote for such a major constitutional change that a simple majority was considered sufficient, particularly when the consequences (good or bad) were very confusing, to say the least. It is interesting that a majority of 66% in favour is required when MPs vote for a General Election. Why were constituents not treated similarly in the referendum?
- Nic

"The noble one is not a mere instrument"– Confucius. Sarah, I believe you are showing that you are not just a cog in the machine. Though you may lose your current position, if you're doing what's right, it will be for the best in the end. To those who take grievance from her actions: We are all individuals here; nobody is forced to do what you want them to do. If you are unhappy with what they do, tell them calmly the reasons why and they will listen to you calmly. They are not necessarily trying to go against you; perhaps they are trying to do what they think is right and best in their situation. Maybe something they can see from their vantage point makes that course of action look better than it does from yours, and not just personal gain. I'm not saying that for instance a councillor is superior to a voter; but being directly involved in the political process she may see some things more clearly. Maybe her actions will unexpectedly turn out good for you. Even if Sarah didn't do what you wanted her to do, it doesn't mean she has something against you. You can assume that Sarah is out to get you, or out to gain something for herself, and get all worked up and angry, but I'm not sure how much good that does either of you or us as a whole. I'm sure she knows that people are suffering from the way things are; but to make a real and lasting change for the better can't necessarily happen in an instant, nor may the process take precisely the path you want it to. Maybe what seemed like a good step at one point in time, now doesn't seem like such a good step. This is not necessarily evidence of someone's intention turning against you, or evidence that they were against you all along; perhaps it is just them acting strategically, updating their course moment-by-moment, still aiming for the best result for all of us in the end. To those who say asking for a second referendum is going against democracy; if a first referendum is democracy, how is a second referendum not also democracy? Can the people not change their minds? Changing one's course mid-way in this case is not necessarily a sign of weakness or "flip-flopping"; it is a sign of flexibility and awareness. It is a sign of strength to admit that you were wrong. Some argue that having seen the result but being "sore losers", those in government made the whole process difficult just because of their soreness. Maybe there is some soreness there. But that wouldn't be the whole picture. The other side of the picture is that it is indeed difficult to do something like this well and cleanly. Maybe we need a breather. If the country still doesn't like the result, maybe we can have a third referendum :) more and more referendums means a better and better democracy, right? In any case, we can see that the whole issue is still controversial; so another referendum can be considered a refinement in the democratic process... I would like to ask if those who have such trust in democracy can trust it once again. Maybe the "will of the people" can change. Those who say "the losers have to accept the result", surely wouldn't object to "losing" a second referendum if the new, more informed, democratic will of the people changed from the last time? There are pros and cons. You can object that a second referendum is "forced", "sore losing". But you can also say that a second referendum benefits from having had time to reflect further on the matter. I hope that people can see the benefit of it.
- James

Many thanks Sarah for once again representing the best interests of the people of the UK and voting as you have. Now the quicker parliament puts in place what’s necessary to prevent a ‘No Deal’ exit the better for everyone. And then let the people decide - either Theresa Mays ‘Withdrawal Agreement’ or ‘Remain’ People can cast a vote based upon the facts and not on the nonsense articulated by Champions of Leave in the last referendum. Again, many thanks.
- Peter

Dr Wollaston, Peter and all who want a second referendum – I have absolutely no issue with a 'fair' referendum - I don’t think it would change anything and perhaps lead to even more division. However, the question suggested by Dr Wollaston and many of you for a ‘Peoples Vote’ – i.e. Remain or Mays (overwhelmingly rejected) Deal – is as far from right and democratic as I think it is possible to be. Where is the real Leave option? Why is Dr Wollaston and other ‘Peoples Vote’ supporters determined to not present this as an option? “….You can have a ‘Peoples Vote’ but you won’t have the option to really Leave…!” Those who support a second referendum do you really want a ‘Peoples Vote’? Or do you want to Remain in the EU at all costs? At least be honest about it – but please acknowledge that those who don’t wish to remain in the EU deserve an option to vote for if you have any belief at all in democracy.
- Patrick, Brixham

For the sake of Democracy , we need a second referendum . If there is anyone here or anywhere else who does not now realise we were lied to in the run up to the Referendum. How can we be proud of that ? We know so much more now . What would you have to lose to have another , but more informed referendum . This time , we are quite sure that Turkey is not going to join the EU and 700k wont come straight to the UK for benefits and the we know that the NHS wont get 350m Extra a week - but actually may not have the EU staff to look after us if we did opt out . If they do , it will be becasue we have opened more doors to non europeans ( i have no problem with that ). We know we will lose skilled people , who will go home . We know our mobile phone bills will be higher when we go on hols. We also know that the once strong London banking sector that paid x billions into the Treasury , wont pay those billions once its jobs have been fully exported to Paris , Frankfurt, Holland and other places . We know that WE will have to pay extra in tax to fill that gap ( or perhaps we have yet fewer services from government spending ) or perhaps we borrow more , at higher interest rates and and and . Come on , anyone who is sane knows this execise was a complete waste of time , money , energy . There are so many other things to worry about in life , why was this issue chosen. For the sake of sanity , another vote very soon and get on with it before we have to lay off even more staff .
- G David

Given that our MPs cannot support May’s Deal or No Deal, we need a second referendum. I think the ballot paper should be: Answer Question 1 and Question 2. For each question, vote by putting a cross in the box next to your choice. Question 1 Should the United Kingdom leave the European Union, or reverse its decision and remain a member of the European Union? Leave the European Union [ ] Remain a member of the European Union [ ] Question 2 If the United Kingdom leaves the European Union, should it exit under the terms of the deal agreed between the British Government and the European Union, or exit with no deal? Leave with the deal agreed between the UK and the EU [ ] Leave with no deal [ ]
- Tim

A lot of Remainers just repeating the same tired arguments they had before June 2016. You lost then and as time ticks on, you're losing now. Perhaps change the record. If it involves staying in the EU, I stopped listening two and a half years ago. The EU was always anti-democratic. Now it cheerleaders are showing themselves for anti-democratic bad losers. Happy to have another vote. But the people have already decided to Leave. They did not vote to "leave with a deal" or leave with any other caveat. Just Leave. So it has to happen one way or another. Remain could not be on the ballot paper for any other reason than the establishment don't like the view expressed by the people. Hard luck. The only question is what sort of Leave. So the choices would be Leave with May's deal, or leave without her deal. Her agreement is so bad that I suspect most would vote against it. In any case, unless the government proposes legislation and gets a majority of MPs to vote FOR something (and not just against), then we will leave on WTO terms in ten weeks. I'm fine with that.
- George, Paignton

Couldn't agree more George. It seems there's an abundance of people that agreed to participate in a vote with the intention of ignoring the result if it wasn't to their liking; bad faith. A democracy relies on good faith in these situations. Instead we see 'smoke & mirrors', 'muddying the waters', weasel words and worst of all the claim people didn't know enough. In a democracy, with any vote, you could claim that some didn't know enough. The Referendum was In or Out, with the promise that Government would implement the decision, this was then part of major party manifestos and then put in to law. The 'correct' path is to try to get a good deal, failing which we leave on WTO rules as embodied in law, yet we have politicians like Sarah Wollaston doing their best to subvert the people's will, claiming that they are representatives not delegates. On this issue they are delegates, change in sovereignty has to be put to the people under the Constitution ! Time to move on, if we don't like being outside the EU, we can rejoin.
- John

Why are some people so scared of another referendum? Is it that they think they might lose? If you are so convinced that we should leave, then man up and grow some. Take on the 48% and see what happens.
- bob

So resign and good riddance. Don’t forget we had a referendum because Cameron was afraid of UKIP. If you cheat us out of leaving, how much support do you suppose will flip back to to UKIP?
- John D

I have tried to engage with Dr Sarah and have come to the conclusion we need a second vote.. Clearly we did not know what we were voting for at the last election when Dr Sarah stood on a manifesto to leave, respecting the referendum result.. Anyone who supports their government in a vote of confidence, but will not support their negotiated position and calls for remain, pretending it is in the interest of the people to rerun the election, should resign the party and stand down so we have a choice who should represent us based on their actual beliefs rather than a lie.
- Giles, Paignton

Spot on Sarah. The true facts and catastrophic impacts of the no deal are now clear. The decision should now be taken to the people in the light of this. BREXIT cannot be delivered in the way that it was sold.
- Paul Church

First points. We have another vote. It is still leave. Will Parliament then implement Article 50? We need to go back to the EU hard and tgreaten the worse and negotiate from strength not weakness. To lose out to an EU President with an alcohol problem it beyond characature. Secondly. Every single government economic prediction on Brexit has been dramatically wrong. Currently we have third highest economic growth forecasts in the G7 according to the IMF. More people in work at anytime in my lifetime and inflation at 2.3% and wages growing at 3.4%. BREXIT post predictions predicted slump. So where to go? I have never seen anything like it from both sides of the argument. Thirdly, we need to come down the crisis talk. Win or lose - from whatever standpoint- the EU will punish us. Thirdly. Watch what is going on elsewhere in the EU. It's not good and tax harmonisation will be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Fourthly. Dr Wollaston needs to accept she is no longer a conservative even with a small c and resign the whip. Your tweets recently only confirm that fact.
- Andy

Seems an awful lot of fuss for what it costs to be in the EU, about £30 per year for the average taxpayer - check your latest notification from HMRC of tax paid if you don't believe me.
- Derek

Sarah as a life long conservative supporter may I thank you once again for all that you are doing to protect the best interests of this country - if you are ever deselected then not only will this constituency have lost a great MP but also my vote. Please keep up the great work and don’t waiver in the face of adversity.
- Peter (Kingsbridge)

Dear Sarah I am not one of your constituents but after reading so much negative venom from some who are I am writing to post a message of support for the brave stand you have taken. The longer this farce continues the clearer it becomes that both main parties are morally bankrupt and incapable of moving things forward in this country either on Brexit or on anything else. Good luck to you and every success to you and your moderate parliamentary colleagues to avoid a no deal Brexit.
- Larry

Post a comment

See older posts (49 more)Loading...

See all posts (59)