Sir, – In response to Bill Bailey's letter (September 4th), he would do well to be reminded that everyone knows the UK does not need permission to leave the EU. The UK government signed an article 50 notice (albeit precipitously) and this has been naturally accepted. The argument relating to "not needing permission to leave" is a false one, like so many Brexiter arguments. Whilst Brexit will have significant negative effects here, those who will be hurt most and making the most noise about it are his own people – not Ireland, not the EU. It is not hypocrisy for British parliamentarians to reject exiting without a deal; it is common sense and was a feature of party manifestos. That it is also their responsibility to protect the economic interests of their constituents goes without saying. Understandably this process is unpalatable for Brexiters; but then, they were warned it would be. – Yours, etc,
DANNY RAFFERTY,
Raheny,
Dublin 5.
Sir, – Bill Bailey misses the point that it is the UK preventing the UK from leaving Europe. The EU now sits on the sidelines, utterly bemused by extraordinary UK government behaviour. As the toxic nostalgia begins to lift, the consequences of leaving the EU, to which almost half of all UK exports are sent, without a confirmed agreement becomes clear. Thankfully, common sense at least prevailed for 21 courageous Conservative members. The consequences of a disorderly Brexit for other nations are extremely severe. Permission is not the issue, accountability is. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL O’LEARY,
Monkstown,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – Your letter writer Eoin Ó Murchú (September 4th) claims UK leaders are constrained by the EU fiscal compact. However, the UK opted out of the rules, which were actually introduced a decade after the Maastricht Treaty.
Furthermore, I understand Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn wants out of the EU to pursue a socialist path. This is a vastly different ideology compared to free-market capitalism which dominates in most of the developed world. It is unclear Brexit was a vote for socialism. It seems more likely it was a rejection of the austerity agenda pursued by the UK government after the financial crisis.
As such, I refer your letter writer to the words of the UN special rapporteur, Prof Philip Aston, in his assessment of poverty in the UK published last November. He said: “Resources were available to the Treasury at the last budget that could have transformed the situations of millions of people living in poverty but the political choice was made to fund tax cuts for the wealthy instead.” – Yours, etc,
NATASHA BROWNE.
Dublin 3.
Sir, – As Boris Johnson visits Dublin on Monday for talks with Taoiseach Leo Varadkar on post-Brexit agrifood regulations, he might like to know that the leprechauns in my back garden have assured me that they will stop at nothing to reopen negotiations on a new deal with Brussels. – Yours, etc,
MICHAEL CULLEN,
Sandycove,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – As Westminster tied itself in knots, reaching desperately for arcane rules and protocols, I was keen to savour the live spectacle. Arriving home from work, I put on Sky News to see Jacob Rees-Mogg droning on, evoking a school master from a black-and-white Ealing comedy, still blithely unaware of the advent of technicolour. This was interspersed with repeated slow-motion replays of a middle-aged man walking slowly across a room before sitting down.
Has history ever been so simultaneously compelling and mind-numbingly boring? – Yours, etc,
BRIAN O’BRIEN,
Kinsale,
Co Cork.