Our MP Emma Little Pengelly has three significant
qualities. The first is that she is the
only woman member of the ten Democratic Unionists elected to Westminster,
having won the seat in last year’s snap General Election in June. She is also the party’s second youngest MP and
a qualified barrister.
As the Brexit debate has dominated public discourse
for three or more years, especially since the referendum in June 2016, ordinary
citizens have become increasingly involved in what is dubbed the UK’s gravest
national issue in generations.
One reason for the most recent upsurge of voter
interest has been the exhortation of the Prime Minister herself. All of this is happening in a frequent atmosphere
of turmoil in and out of Parliament. That
includes resignations of Government Ministers and warnings of economic disaster
from financial institutions.
Add to the mix the oxymoron of the Brexit pledge to
take back control of the UK’s borders and the objective to keep the UK’s only
land border with the EU “seamless.” And
in Northern Ireland, there is the spectacle of business leaders supporting a
deal which is anathema to the DUP, despite its “confidence and supply” contract
with the Conservative Government.
This exchange of views gives a flavour of the
arguments for and against the UK’s membership of the European Union.
Dear Mrs
Pengelly
Following
the Prime Minister's open letter of 24 November and HM Government’s social
media post today explaining the benefits of Brexit for Northern Ireland, I wish
to brief you before you vote next week on the deal it has signed with the
EU.
My
concern is that you aren’t representing your constituents’ express wishes. A prima facie case suggests that your party doesn't
have a mandate for its actions.
After the
referendum, our then First Minister acknowledged the party's inability to
command majority support in Northern Ireland saying plaintively that “We always
knew this would happen as four of the five regional parties campaigned to
Remain.”
South
Belfast voted by a 69.5% majority to remain in the EU.
I have
never discovered what empirical evidence your party based its case that
Northern Ireland would fare better outside the EU. In the lead-up to the
referendum the evidence presented from institutions, business, science and
education about the consequences of withdrawal was explicit.
Subsequent
accounts of the telling of lies about NHS funding and the disavowal of evidence
besmirched the Leave case. The quip that the country was sick of experts
undermined the integrity of the UK mandate to leave. And now a criminal
investigation is in hand about alleged illegality regarding funding of its
campaign.
Bearing
in mind the OFMDFM guide for policy-making (the red book) which says that
Government policy must be based on evidence, I would appreciate your direction
as to the datasets, analysis and sources being used as the basis for your party
policy. This has become more relevant since it signed a binding policy support
agreement with the Conservative Government.
I'm sure
you take pride in the party’s influential role in being a confidence and supply
ally loyal to the Conservative Government and of the enormous pay-back for
"all of the people of Northern Ireland" from hard-pressed UK
taxpayers. You must be proud of your party's promotion from provincial
politics to being pivotal in decision-making at a national level.
That said,
your party's expensive (if controversial) advertisement in "Metro"
failed to persuade its target audience of Londoners to vote Leave. And
that incursion was well before the party held the reins of power.
If you
support of the party's hostility to the UK/EU deal, I would be grateful if you
could advise me of the precise basis for your opposition. On what new
evidence are you basing this reaction?
You are
aware of the substantial support from across the Northern Ireland economy, its
business and farming leaders in favour of the UK/EU deal. They know it is
a compromise, a prospect offering some certainty as opposed to the alternative
of crashing out without a deal. They hear the EU emphasising that it's
the best and only deal.
Many of
those business people are your constituents.
You are
aware of the recent statistical evidence and analysis from HM Treasury and also
from the Bank of England, both of which warn of adverse impacts from Brexit. Do
you think that this evidence provides an overwhelming case for ending the
Brexit project?
The key
message from your party is clear, namely that you are especially terrified
about the impact of the Government deal on the "precious union" of
Northern Ireland and the UK. If you
“ditch the backstop” what is your alternative for the UK/EU land border?
You will
be aware of comments by John Major about a second referendum on independence
being undeniable to Scotland if we leave the EU. You also know of the
Scottish First Minister's recent comments articulating reasons for Scotland to
remain in the EU customs union and single market.
Her case
has echoes of what business leaders in Northern Ireland want now and voted for
two years ago.
To some,
you are eschewing regional loyalty thereby endangering your mandate together
with the very union that you claim to be protecting.
Do you
ally yourself with remarks that have been uttered to belittle the business and
farming leaders who support the deal?
Does
name-calling of conscientious Northern Irish job providers and telling off
the PM for time-wasting show respect for public discourse?
Does the
DUP have special advisors with expertise and who know more than the Treasury or
the Bank of England economists?
If your
party collides with the Conservative Party leadership, your electors could
suggest other policy issues which might command their approval more so than
does your pro-Brexit stance.
These include
querying the logic of supporting a party which is implementing loathed policies
that do not act in the interests of your electorate. Examples are
Universal Credit and the bedroom tax. Where is the Northern Irish support
for arms sales to Saudi Arabia and responsibility for the UK’s role in the
humanitarian disaster in the Yemen?
Does it
serve the people of Northern Ireland for your party to prop up a Government
which promotes an uncaring agenda?
Particular
problems for your party relate to trust and to credibility.
The
handling of UK taxpayers money in projects like the Social Investment Scheme
and in the Renewable Heating Initiative do not inspire public confidence in
your party's administration and prudence with public funding.
Trust may
be a factor motivating business sector to endorse the PM's pragmatism rather
than your party's adversarial line.
You are
king-makers at Westminster advocating a divorce from the EU; at the same time
you share "accountability” (if not “responsibility") for the paralysis
of devolution domestically, almost like another divorce due to irreconcilable
differences. Negative behaviour disenchants
electors.
Unthinkable
thoughts about dire consequences re-emerging from a hard border have been voiced
in the former scenario; with the prospect of an unviable political unit
emerging from the latter’s continuance. Neither
will win votes, together they present massive dangers.
One
positive at least is that your team takes its Parliamentary seats, even if it
is not advocating the Northern Ireland mandate on Brexit.
Much is
made of the inconsistency in your party's protestations on regulatory alignment
with the UK.
Apart
from its denial of social legislation enjoyed by our kith and kin in the rest
of these islands, there is also the example of European citizenship.
Ireland is processing many applications to welcome eligible British citizens
with EU passports issued in Dublin (one of your party colleagues being a supporter
of this facility).
Although
your party is determined to achieve its goal of taking Northern Ireland (and
Scotland) out of the EU against our express will, you cannot and will not deny
us our cherished European citizenship and rights.
This
constituency is pleased to have a woman representative in Westminster. As the party’s only female MP, you are in a
unique position of beneficial influence. Being the biggest party in Northern Ireland
you have a special responsibility to represent the best interests of your
constituents. As a party whose very name heralds its credentials, the
clue being in its first titular adjective, its actions cannot be allowed to
belie that function.
I worry
when politicians appear to ignore their electorate, when they disregard
evidence without alternative data or analysis, and when they lack care and
caution in public discourse.
Should
the Democratic Unionists vote en bloc for a divorce from Europe that produces
detrimental outcomes for Northern Ireland and our islands, you will not easily
be forgiven.
I beg you
to reflect on the express will of your electors as your personal guide about
how to vote next week and in all consequent Brexit matters.
Within ninety minutes, this prompt and friendly
response landed in my inbox.
Dear Michael,
Thank you for your email and for your detailed
arguments in relation to the issue of Brexit.
I understand the concern about the current
position the UK finds itself in. I can assure you, members from all
parties across the House of Commons and across the UK are concerned about the
Withdrawal Agreement and believe it to be a bad deal for the UK.
There are a number of specific issues, in
particular around the proposed backstop. I do not believe the backstop is
necessary. Indeed, I believe this issue could have been resolved by
including a firm commitment from both the UK and the EU not to have a hard
border. This commitment could be in the treaty and therefore becomes a
legally enforceable. This would put the onus on both parties to find ways
to ensure the border has not need to be a hard border.
As the backstop is at the moment, unlike the
current position with the EU, there would be no legal way the UK could remove
itself from it. I do not see any reason why the EU would accept any other
proposals to go into the substantive final agreement on trade when they have
this one in their back pocket. Why would they?
On the broader issue of why that is important –
the UK is the 5th largest economy in the world. NI makes up
just 3% of that. Severing NI from the UK in economic terms, fracturing
the UK single market is economic lunacy. The entire UK economy is driven
from the South East of England (and although we will of course want to pull our
weight and grow our economy, realistically the UK economy will always be driven
from the South East of England and the City of London). This driver
supports us when times are good, and provides a buffer in the difficult
times. If we are separated from that then what is our economic
future? Do you seriously think the ROI will be on the global stage trying
to ensure our economy strives and we get jobs and investment? Of course not,
and understandably so as they will be seeking jobs and investment for the
Republic of Ireland as is their duty.
The arguments for Brexit were simple – the UK
wanted to make its own laws, strike its own trade deals, control its own
borders and did not share the “ever closer union” agenda of the leadership of
the European Union. Those things remain worthy, but of course the EU will
make life as difficult as possible (they would do as they don’t want other
countries to leave…). There were some good things about the EU of course,
I could see that – but the reality is that the EU had the opportunity to
address British concerns when David Cameron asked them to but they
over-negotiated and refused to address those concerns. I honestly believe
if they had given David Cameron something he could have sold to show the issues
were being addressed then the referendum would have went a different way (the
irony is, of course, that the EU is now having to reform due to Brexit and
concerns about anyone else leaving).
It is also worth pointing out that all of the
UK’s growth trading markets were outside of the EU. The Eurozone is
tottering on the brink of another crisis, and they know it. All of this
does not make for a healthy EU future in the short to medium term (never mind
issues of the rise of the right across the EU).
Lastly, I believe I am representing my
constituents to the best of my ability by trying to ensure a good and sensible
deal as we Brexit, this Withdrawal Agreement is appalling and must be
rejected. That is a view shared by leavers and remainers across the
house. However, it is also worth pointing out that if all MPs voted the
way their constituency voted then this would mean an overwhelming majority for
leave in the house (70% of conservative seats voted leave, 60% of Labour seats
and the majority of DUP seats). This would not progress an agenda of
“remain” very far.
All of these issues are challenging. I
appreciate the time you took to communicate your views to me. Please do
be assured I will do all I can to get the best possible deal for all in NI.
Kind Regards,
Emma Little Pengelly MP
At
this point, the constituent is content to have had concerns recorded and
welcomes the polite and firm acknowledgement.
Whereas issues remain, it would be inappropriate to react to the elected
Member’s reply here and now; there may be another occasion to respond.
©Michael McSorley 2018
