QResear.ch

#24545121 at 2026-04-27 14:06:25 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29942: GM Moab Panic Monday: It's All About U1 Edition

UK: 'A DISASTER!' - NIGHTMARE for Starmer as Speaker confirms HUGE vote on sleaze probe into PM

Sir Keir Starmer will face a Commons vote on whether he should be referred to a parliamentary sleaze inquiry over the Mandelson vetting scandal.

Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle announced that he will allow a debate and vote tomorrow on whether to refer the PM to the Privileges Committee.

The Tories and other opposition parties have accused Sir Keir of misleading Parliament over the process which led to the peer's appointment as plum US ambassador role.

But Labour has accused opposition parties of playing "silly political games" over attempts to launch a formal investigation into whether Sir Keir Starmer lied to MPs over the appointment of Lord Peter Mandelson.

It is up to Sir Lindsay to decide whether to allow a vote on whether the matter should be referred to the panel which investigated former premier Boris Johnson over partygate.

The Prime Minister is facing mounting pressure over the revelations about Lord Mandelson's vetting process and Sir Keir's handling of it, including his decision to sack Foreign Office chief Sir Olly Robbins.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh-k5Sa2aIs

#24526596 at 2026-04-22 13:13:44 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29917: GM Halfway n Q Bread Edition

>>24526591
cont…

The trial will be presided over by a High Court judge. The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The defendants will have full opportunity to challenge the evidence presented. Nothing in this report should be taken as any indication of guilt or innocence, which is a matter solely for the jury to determine.

The facts are what they are. The jury will decide what they mean.

The question is not whether this trial will be a political disaster for Keir Starmer, but whether it will happen at all before the local elections. Legitimate concerns surround the conditions in which the Old Bailey case opens, or whether it will be quietly pushed down the line and given a new date.

This has been the most turbulent period of the Starmer premiership, and the political ground is shifting fast. Those concerns are compounded by a simple question of timing. Labour is currently projected to lose as many as 1,828 council seats at the May 7 elections in England, with the party projected to lose control in heartland councils including Wigan, Sunderland and Barnsley Poll Check, places that were once as safe as houses. If the trial date were to move for any procedural reason, those concerns would only deepen. Cases of this public weight require stability of process as much as they require legal rigour.

The magnitude of this trial is also inseparable from a question that Westminster cannot currently answer: whether Keir Starmer will even still be Prime Minister when the jury is sworn in. Today's revelations have sharpened that uncertainty considerably. Starmer faced the Commons on Monday to explain how he was unaware that Lord Mandelson had failed his security vetting before taking up his post as ambassador to Washington, blaming the Foreign Office's top civil servant, Sir Olly Robbins, for deliberately keeping him in the dark. His statement came amid mounting calls for resignation and accusations that he had misled parliament. Starmer was warned of the reputational risks associated with appointing Mandelson due to his continued relationship with Epstein, and yet the appointment went ahead. Denying that he misled the House while conceding that information "the House should have had" was withheld is a distinction that satisfies no one.

The most significant voice to join the calls for Starmer's resignation is not one that comes from the opposition benches. Lord Maurice Glasman, the founder of the Blue Labour movement and the intellectual conscience of Labour's working-class tradition, has said plainly what many in the parliamentary party are thinking but lack the courage to say publicly. "If you can't own your mistakes, you can't move. All he needed to say was 'we made an error.' But he's completely stuck in saying he hasn't done anything wrong, so this can't go away," Glasman told the Telegraph. His conclusion was unequivocal: "He cannot conceivably continue as a credible Prime Minister any longer. And that's all because he cannot say 'I made a mistake, I'm sorry.'"

What gives Glasman's verdict its particular weight is not merely his standing within the Labour tradition. He had warned about this appointment before it was made. He had advised Starmer's former chief of staff Morgan McSweeney against appointing Mandelson, citing his longstanding ties to Jeffrey Epstein.

The warning was delivered. It was ignored. "The abdication of responsibility and the turn to procedure is really not the way ahead," Glasman said. "Politicians should govern and make decisions in our sovereign democracy." He also noted that May 7 is going to be another debacle for his party, and that the crisis is paralysing a government that has urgent business before it.

cont…

#24526574 at 2026-04-22 13:08:38 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29917: GM Halfway n Q Bread Edition

UK: Labour MP breaks ranks and calls on Keir Starmer to RESIGN - 'Fed up of psychodrama!'

Labour MP Jonathan Brash has called on Keir Starmer to resign and said it was a case of "if, not when" he will leave Downing Street.

The Hartlepool representative told GB News he does not think "anybody reasonably expects the Prime Minister to lead the party into the next election".

Mr Brash was speaking after the Prime Minister received a grilling from Tory Leader Kemi Badenoch over his handling of the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US ambassador, following revelations that the disgraced peer had failed security vetting and the explosive testimony of Sir Olly Robbins.

"They just need to get a grip. I'm completely fed up about it, and I think it's got to the point now where I genuinely think that, you know, as far as the Prime Minister is concerned, it's not a case of if, it's when.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QY70pAfuH2A

#24518894 at 2026-04-20 14:41:59 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29907: GM Moab Panic Monday: Lions n Tigers n BQQMS Oh Yeah Edition

UK LIVE: Starmer faces Commons FURY to deliver 'make-or-break' statement on Mandelson

Live from the House of Commons as Sir Keir Starmer delivers a statement amid mounting calls for his resignation.

It follows revelations last week that his US Ambassadorial pick, the former Labour peer Lord Mandelson, failed his security vetting.

Foreign Office boss Olly Robbins was blamed by No10 and then fired, but questions are being asked as to the Prime Minister's knowledge and involvement in the process.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JNzNW_jlV_Q

#24518580 at 2026-04-20 12:35:07 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29907: GM Moab Panic Monday: Lions n Tigers n BQQMS Oh Yeah Edition

No 10 suggests Starmer inadvertently misled Parliament over Mandelson vetting
Jack Fenwick
Political correspondent

Downing Street has effectively said the prime minister inadvertently misled Parliament over Lord Mandelson's vetting.

Asked repeatedly whether the prime minister misled parliament, his official spokesman said: "The prime minister would never knowingly mislead parliament or the public.

"He's clear though that this information should have been provided to Parliament, it should have been provided to him, it should have been provided to other government ministers and so he will obviously update the House with the full information later today.

"He'll be updating Parliament with information that it should have had."

—

Olly Robbins will give evidence to Foreign Affairs Committee
Olly Robbins will give evidence before the Foreign Affairs Committee tomorrow morning, it's been confirmed.

Robbins, who had been the Foreign Office's permanent under-secretary since January 2025, left his post last week.

The top civil servant's departure followed reports by the Guardian that his department did not tell the prime minister that Peter Mandelson had failed security vetting, and decided to let him take up the US ambassador role.

The BBC understands Robbins was effectively sacked after Starmer and Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper lost confidence in him.

Reports by the Financial Times suggest Robbins is contemplating legal action over his dismissal.

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/ce35qnexlv8t

He'll weasel out of trouble again…

#24507057 at 2026-04-16 21:15:25 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #29889: Pope dragging that which is sacred into darkness and filth Edition

>>24507055
cont…


The revelation that the now former ambassador was not granted clearance by UK UKSV, a division of the Cabinet Office that scrutinises the background of prospective civil servants, will raise further questions about the prime minister's judgment in appointing him.

Starmer will also be pressed over whether he misled the public in remarks about the security vetting process, which he said had given Mandelson "clearance for the role".

It is not known who in the Foreign Office made the decision to overrule UKSV.

Sir Olly Robbins, the current permanent secretary in the Foreign Office, was the department's top civil servant in late January 2025 when the decision was made, having taken up the role earlier that month. The foreign secretary was David Lammy, who is now the deputy prime minister.

Starmer's then chief of staff, Morgan McSweeney, who resigned in February over his role in appointing Mandelson, could also now be asked whether he had any involvement in, or knowledge or, the decision to overrule UKSV's denial of clearance.

Friends of McSweeney told the Guardian that he had no knowledge of Mandelson's developed vetting process or the outcome.

That decision was made weeks before Mandelson was due to take up his post in February 2025. Seven months later, he was sacked over his relationship with the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

Ministers and officials are now likely to be pressed over whether they have been fully transparent about the process that led to his appointment.

At a press conference in Hastings on 5 February, Starmer responded to a question from a journalist by saying there had been "security vetting, carried out independently by the security services, which is an intensive exercise that gave him [Mandelson] clearance for the role. You have to go through that before you take up the post." He added: "Clearly both the due diligence and the security vetting need to be looked at again."

This appeared to partly put the blame for Mandelson's appointment on the failure of a vetting process which, according to sources, his government had overruled.

As a result of Mandelson's sacking as US ambassador on 11 September 2025, after the extent of his relationship with Epstein came to light, parliamentary scrutiny mounted. On 16 September, Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, and Robbins, her top official, responded to questions over the vetting process with a letter to the foreign affairs select committee.
Yvette Cooper.
Yvette Cooper. Photograph: Andy Rain/EPA

"Peter Mandelson's security vetting was conducted to the usual standard set for developed vetting in line with established Cabinet Office policy," the letter said, explaining that the process had been undertaken by UKSV on behalf of the FCDO.

Cooper and Robbins said the process had "concluded with DV clearance being granted by the FCDO in advance of Lord Mandelson taking up post in February".

What the letter failed to inform parliament was that UKSV had denied Mandelson's clearance - a recommendation that threatened Starmer having to withdraw a high-profile appointment he had already made public.

UKSV's vetting decisions are almost always enforced by government departments, but they technically have the authority to override the recommendations. The precise reason that UKSV recommended that Mandelson not receive clearance is now likely to be subject to intense speculation.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2026/apr/16/revealed-mandelson-failed-vetting-but-foreign-office-overruled-decision

#7830925 at 2020-01-16 18:30:10 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #10022: Follow The Pens Edition

May's Brexit Negotiator Olly Robbins Handed a Knighthood

Former Prime Minister Theresa May's adviser Oliver Robbins has been handed a knighthood, despite the Brexit deal he assisted crafting being rejected three times in the House of Commons.

Prince William knighted the former Brexit negotiator a Knight Commander of the Order of St Michael and St George for his supposed public service on Tuesday. Mrs May had named the civil servant in her resignation honours list late last year.

The honour proved controversial, given Mr Robbins, now titled Sir Olly, was blamed not only for the failure of May's deal to pass but was accused of attempting to block the United Kingdom from leaving the EU.

"I would have thought a Legion d'honneur would have been more appropriate for his services to the European Union," a Conservative MP said in September when it was announced the career bureaucrat would be honoured with a knighthood.

Brexit Party leader Nigel Farage had accused the Civil Service of trying to thwart Brexit, saying in October 2018 during May's talks with the bloc: "The problem I'm afraid is there is a rogue element in these negotiations. A group of people who do not wish to see a solution, who put up an immovable brick wall to stop us from breaking free. I regret to say it isn't your chief negotiator Monsieur Barnier, it is actually the British civil service, Olly Robbins' team.

"They signed up years ago to the European dream, they have been happy to take their orders from Brussels, they are now out to sabotage Brexit. They are indeed the enemy within."

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2020/01/16/mays-brexit-negotiator-Olly-Robbins-handed-knighthood/

#6527539 at 2019-05-18 11:22:24 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #8347: Yellow Vests Acte 27 Standing Strong Edition

You need to shift the investigation from US law to UK surveylance law. The UK laws are not symetirical to US laws. All the rules that the US operators need to follow don't apply to the UK. The responsibility is much more centralised with the Home Secretary and she has a responsibility to the PM. The laws are shifted upwards. A judge still needs to give the OK. Because the law is more focused at the top level it means you can follow the paper trail at the top level - and that paper trail will mirror the antics in the US Whitehouse.

Under UK law the Home Sec (Theresa May) at the time would have been responsible for signing off surveylance in anybody who was not a threat to the UK - and - she would need to present evidence (dodgy dossier) to a UK judge. Things get interesting here because the UK HomeSec was even closer to the fraudulent dossier than Clinton, so has even less excuse about knowing it was fake.

In the UK prosecution of politicans, judges, policemen etc is handled by a special group of the Crown Prosecution Service who operate out of Crown Court House, on the south side of Southwark bridge, and they must
decide if a prosecution is in the "public interest" or not which gives them scope to squash any embarrassing charges.

The civil servant (perm gov) with the Hone Sec during Spygate is a guy called Olly Robbins who now runs (or rather blocks) the Brexit negotiations. So if May broke the law by soyug in Trump then he knows where the bodies are buried.

It doesn't take a genius to see that May could come under pressure from Robbins to deliver brexit in name only (brino). Also that the same globalist actors in the UK who spied on Trump also thwarted Brexit. Same agenda. Same group of people. It might also explain why May dragged out Brexit even though her brino treaty it is now getting voted down for the fourth time and the Conservatives are down below 10% in the polls. She simply stayed in power long enough to see Trump be charged with Russia collusion. She now knows the gig is up and she will 100% come under scrutiny for being central to the biggest political scandle in US history. A scandle the US will follow to the UK.

What about oversight. Well the head of the UK intelligence oversight committee is an EU remainer who has also tried to thwart Brexit. So you will get no oversight. The Labour Party and MSM hate Trump for having the wrong kind of virtue so they will not question spying on him.

So look across the pond my friends for a rich trail of evidence and corruption by the anti democratic globalists.

#5687121 at 2019-03-14 22:41:17 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #7273: UK Bread Gets Cherry Popped Edition

>>5686818 UK bread

BREXIT BOMBSHELL: A German Brexit? A Scandal Of Subversive Statecraft

Cast your mind back to summer last year. The Cabinet gathered at the Prime Minister's country retreat of Chequers, on the sylvan Chiltern downs. There was very important business: Theresa May, flanked by senior civil servant Olly Robbins, presented the draft agreement for Britain's departure from the EU. For the first time, ministers (including Brexit secretary David Davis and foreign secretary Boris Johnson) saw the proposed terms - and the extent to which May would abide by her pledge of 'Brexit means Brexit'. The chief whip instructed that nobody could leave without consenting to the Withdrawal Agreement, unless they resigned - and must then find their way home without ministerial transport.

For Leavers in the Cabinet, it was a shocker. Scarcely anything appropriate for a renewed sovereign nation could be found in this document, which seemed an abject surrender to Messrs Barnier and Juncker. For Brexit voters, it was hard to believe that their government would consider such punitive clauses; their faith in Theresa May, until then buoyant, was shattered. And this document, we were told, was only the initial negotiating stance - it could get worse. In the morass since the referendum on 23rd June 2016, this has been the most significant subsequent event to date.

It was widely reported that Theresa May paid a visit to Angela Merkel in Berlin shortly before the Chequers meeting. What did they discuss? We weren't told at the time. According to a confidential source who has seen a complete transcript of the meeting, the two leaders agreed to a plan that Mrs May allegedly told the Chancellor would "appease" Brexit voters while nonetheless enabling her to get rid of those Tories who were (in her words) "against progress and unity in the EU." According to the transcript, Mrs May is also reported to have agreed "to keep as many EU laws and institutions in effect as she could despite the current groundswell of anti-EU hysteria in Britain" (again, apparently her words). It is claimed that both leaders agreed that the only realistic future for the UK was as a member of the EU, and that in the likely course of events Britain would re-join the EU in full at some time after the next general election.

1/3

#5625572 at 2019-03-11 18:32:14 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #7194: DARPA>LifeLog>FB Edition

Subversive Statecraft Scandal Exposes Bombshell German-Designed Brexit Plan

Cast your mind back to summer last year. The Cabinet gathered at the Prime Minister's country retreat of Chequers, on the sylvan Chiltern downs. There was very important business: Theresa May, flanked by senior civil servant Olly Robbins, presented the draft agreement for Britain's departure from the EU. For the first time, ministers (including Brexit secretary David Davis and foreign secretary Boris Johnson) saw the proposed terms - and the extent to which May would abide by her pledge of 'Brexit means Brexit'. The chief whip instructed that nobody could leave without consenting to the Withdrawal Agreement, unless they resigned - and must then find their way home without ministerial transport.

For Leavers in the Cabinet, it was a shocker. Scarcely anything appropriate for a renewed sovereign nation could be found in this document, which seemed an abject surrender to Messrs Barnier and Juncker. For Brexit voters, it was hard to believe that their government would consider such punitive clauses; their faith in Theresa May, until then buoyant, was shattered. And this document, we were told, was only the initial negotiating stance - it could get worse. In the morass since the referendum on 23rd June 2016, this has been the most significant subsequent event to date.

https://www.blacklistednews.com/article/71533/subversive-statecraft-scandal-exposes-bombshell-germandesigned-brexit.html

#5172075 at 2019-02-14 19:05:31 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #6607: AG BARR ALMOST CONFIRMED Edition

We Will Not be Leaving the EU, Brexit Will Never be Delivered

I am even more convinced that Brexit will never be delivered.

Do you remember that wonderful feeling of euphoria that we all woke up to on the morning of the 24 June 2016? That we defied all the odds, we defied Project Fear, we defied those who knew better than us and we had voted for something really meaningful, that our voted really counted this time?

As I drove over Westminster Bridge at 5am for an TV interview, the sun was shining and I saw the Union flag flying majestically over Parliament and thought, we've taken back control of our sovereignty and our flag, the symbol of Great Britain, has real meaning again. I had a tear in my eye, excitement in my stomach and a spring in my step. And now those feelings are crushed.

I do not think Brexit will be delivered, ever.

We have a Remain prime minister, leading a Remain government, with a Remain Opposition, sending a Remain civil servant to Remain Brussels to discuss Brexit. What could possibly go wrong?

The cat was really out of the bag this week. Olly Robbins, top Brexit civil servant and closest ally of Mrs May and directly answerable to her only, was overheard in an EU bar on Tuesday night saying that MPs have a choice, back May's deal or extended Article 50 for a very long time.

The hapless Secretary of State for DexU, floundered on the airwaves yesterday, admitting that talks have taken place in Brussels and London about extending our leaving date. He stated, "We are committed to leaving on the 29th March... any extension is not a unilateral decision". The key word here is 'committed'. That can be reneged upon and that is exactly what is happening. Language is important, it's the carefully crafted get out clause, briefed by the spin doctors.

https://sputniknews.com/columnists/201902141072414218-eu-brexit-uk/

#5157688 at 2019-02-13 18:42:01 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #6588: Moar Indictments are Being Unsealed Edition

Brexit Bombshell: if Mrs May's deal doesn't pass through the Commons, Brexit could be delayed for 21 months

ITV journalist, Angus Walker, overheard May's chief Brexit bureaucrat, Olly Robbins, if the deal isn't agreed to Parliament, Brexit will be delayed.

Michel Barnier refused to comment.

[IMO, bar talk is far more reliable than official statements.]
https://www.itv.com/news/2019-02-12/exclusive-uk-chief-brexit-negotiator-Olly-Robbins-warns-mps-the-choice-is-mays-deal-or-extension/

BritAnons, you know the May/EU is planning another stitch-up, STORM THE OFFICES OF YOUR MP!

#4309478 at 2018-12-14 17:15:32 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #5491: Soup From Scratch Edition

EU Humiliates PM May: Bloc Leaders Vow 'There Will Be No Renegotiation' of Brexit Deal

The European Union has humiliated British prime minister Theresa May in Brussels, telling her "there will be no renegotiation" of her Brexit deal.

Mrs May needs Parliament to approve her deal, but had to pull a vote on it after it became apparent that a coalition of left-wing opposition politicians, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) which props up her minority administration, Brexiteers in her own party, and even some diehard Remainers would not back it, paving the way for a landslide defeat.

This was followed by her own MPs triggering a vote of no confidence in her leadership - which she survived after promising to step down before the next General Election, but badly damaged, with around a third of her parliamentary party and more than half her backbenchers (MPs who are not on the payroll as government ministers) backing the call to oust her.

She had hoped a whistlestop tour of EU capitals and a summit in Brussels would allow her to secure some sort of legally binding concession on her deal's contentious "backstop" - which would see Great Britain indefinitely confined to an effectively EU-controlled "single customs territory" and the British province of Northern Ireland economically annexed by the bloc, with no power to end the arrangement unilaterally - but was slapped down in humiliating fashion.

"We don't want the UK to think there can be any form of renegotiation, that is crystal clear," announced the European Commission's unelected head, Jean-Claude Juncker, at a press conference following the summit - as journalists began to release that draft conclusions of the meeting had been amended to delete the passages offering some warm if ultimately substance-free assurances to the British.

"We can add clarifications but no real changes. There will be no legally binding obligations imposed on the [EU by] withdrawal treaty," he declared.

Juncker also suggested, as Brexiteers have long suspected, that the Remain-voting Prime Minister and her europhile adviser, Olly Robbins, have not really made it clear what they want from Brexit - if anything - telling his audience: "Our UK friends need to say what they want, instead of asking us to say what we want.

"So we would like within a few weeks our UK friends to set out their expectations for us because this debate is sometimes nebulous and imprecise and I would like clarifications."

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2018/12/14/eu-humiliates-pm-may-bloc-leaders-vow-there-will-be-no-renegotiation-of-brexit-deal/

#3941574 at 2018-11-17 19:38:19 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #5013 Saturday Baker Needed & Trouble in Haiti Edition

Brexiteer's Letter to Theresa May

Dear Madam

Over the past few months , there has been a great amount of coverage about your Chequers Plan and the future direction of Brexit.

I have been digesting the information and have come to the conclusion that the Government's plan for Brexit is not really Brexit at all.

When the referendum was announced a little over two years ago, the Government said it would follow the decision of the people.

We voted to leave the EU.

That meant we voted to take back our independence and sovereignty. Yet with a Cabinet stuffed full of Remainers, how on earth can the people trust you or your Government?

Our country is now on course for the softest Brexit on offer. We did NOT vote for this in the EU Referendum. This is an Olly Robbins and Gavin Barwell Brexit.

The question is, why on earth are you letting a Civil Servant and a former Remainer MP dictate Government policy?

You are condemning thousands of loyal party candidates to certain defeat in next year's local elections.

They both undermined David Davis and should be sacked. They answer to the Government, not the other way around.

The Conservative grassroots are up in arms and angry about this gross betrayal of what we voted for. Is it any wonder that constituency members and the wider public are angry about what they see as a betrayal of the biggest democratic vote in our history?

You are condemning thousands of loyal party candidates to certain defeat in next year's local elections. On a broader scale, there is a real chance that if you are still Prime Minister at the time of the next General Election, you will lead us to certain defeat.

And that is before we look at domestic issues such as the roll out of Universal Credit. Lifelong Conservative members are resigning from the party.

I am a grassroots Conservative member and feel let down and betrayed by your Brexit Plan. In effect, you have kept us in a Customs Union and kept open the possibility that freedom of movement of people will continue.

All you have done is succeeded in dividing your own party. In addition, you are alienating the DUP over the issue of what to do about Northern Ireland.

Your Brexit Plan risks the Union and all that it stands for. The grassroots members are the lifeblood of our party. I feel that you are fast losing the confidence of them. Losing not one but two prominent Cabinet Ministers over the last couple of months is careless.

With a raft of ministerial resignations this week including the Brexit Secretary who negotiated your Brexit Plan, surely alarm bells must be ringing in Downing Street? The Chequers Plan is dead!

Your Brexit Plan is a non-Brexit. It is a failure to understand what 17.4m people voted for and has no mathematical chance of being passed by Parliament. I urge you to think again.

I feel that you are not the best person to deliver the Brexit we voted for. It is time to make way for a committed Brexiteer to take over. It is time for you to resign! Stand aside now for the good of your country.

Yours sincerely,

Robert J.F. Barnes

https://voiceofeurope.com/2018/11/brexiteers-letter-to-theresa-may/

#3507481 at 2018-10-17 08:58:43 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #4448: Shills Only Shill, Patriots WIN Edition

Former MI6 boss accuses European advisor to May of working with the EU to keep parts of UK defence under EU control after Brexit.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1032568/Brexit-news-Theresa-May-EU-negotiator-Brexiteer-ex-MI6-boss

Sir Richard accused Olly Robbins, the Prime Minister's Europe advisor since September 2017, of "covertly working" to keep bits of UK defence policy "under EU control".

The astonishing allegations were made by Sir Richard via a letter to The Times. In the letter, Sir Richard accused Mr Robbins of "covertly working to lock UK defence and security under EU control after Brexit".

He added this would "risk fatally compromise our "Five Eyes" intelligence alliance. He said: "It is by far the worst aspect of the Chequers deal and hitherto has not been made clear to the public." The Five Eyes is a close intelligence sharing alliance incorporating the UK, UK, Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

"The withdrawal agreement and proposed defence treaty would keep the UK under EU power permanently after the transition period.

#2108078 at 2018-07-10 19:25:19 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #2658 The Seth Rich Press Conference Was Bogus Edition

BREXIT

Ex-Brexit Minister Slams May: Establishment 'Don't Want to Leave EU', Exit Plan Led by 'Fear and Supplication'

Steve Baker, who resigned from the Department for Exiting the European Union shortly after Secretary of State David Davis, has slammed Theresa May's ultra-soft Brexit plan and the Remainer establishment.

BBC presenter Jo Coburn asked the former Minister of State if it was true he had been left "out of the loop" and his department was "basically marginalised in [the negotiation] process" on the Daily Politics programme in the aftermath of Davis's resignation.

"There's no way of getting around it, yes," admitted Baker.

It has been common knowledge that Remain-supporting Theresa May and her main Brexit adviser, unelected bureaucrat and Soviet Union admirer Olly Robbins, have increasingly undercut and overruled the Department for Exiting the European Union, headed by Brexit supporter David Davis until the Prime Minister's ultra-soft Brexit plan forced him to walk away from her administration

https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/07/10/ex-brexit-minister-slams-may-establishment-dont-want-to-leave-eu-exit-plan-led-by-fear-and-supplication/

Remainers Congratulate May's Brexit Betrayal

Anti-Brexit Members of Parliament have lavished praise on Prime Minister Theresa May as she defended her 'Chequers Agreement' which would see the UK remain effectively tied to the European Union after Brexit.

During an address of the House of Commons by the Prime Minister on Monday afternoon, Liberal Democrat leader Vince Cable - who called the June 23rd, 2016, vote to leave the EU "white nostalgia" - congratulated Mrs May for the White Paper which could put a post-Brexit bilateral free trade deal with the United States at stake.

"I congratulate the Prime Minister for effectively 'killing off' the United States/UK trade agreement by agreeing to retain EU regulatory convergence which of course the Americans cannot accept," said the MP for Twickenham.

"Could I echo the calls she's just heard that now she has lost the support of the Brexit fundamentalists, now is the time to have a national consensus and a majority of the House who do support retaining membership of the Customs Union and Single Market," he added, which would tie the UK to the uncontrolled mass migration of people from the bloc as well as hampering the UK from signing free trade deals with other nations.

https://www.breitbart.com/london/2018/07/09/remainers-congratulate-may-brexit-betrayal/

#1455003 at 2018-05-18 11:30:58 (UTC+1)
Q Research General #1826 Owls in the Box

>>1449911
USA military is the biggest and most powerful in the world. But surely it doesn't want its biggest Nuclear ally to be given away to a competitor by deceitful Ministers?

Twitter: @VeteransBritain :-

"Still no Commons debate on UK membership of EU Defence, despite last week's Defence and Security paper from DExEU and Olly Robbins which proposes to stay in it.
Then again, MPs wouldn't have sufficient knowledge of the subject if they had a chance to discuss it.

UK Ministers don't realise they're being gamed by their own officials.
Last week's appalling 'Security Framework' from DExEU is actually a defence framework too and uses ALL the EU's language.
It leads on policing, but contains massive Defence commitments in the final six pages.

If the Brexit Implementation Period is due to lack of time to make changes, WHY did UK Govt spend time and resources joining all these EU military concepts in 2017:
- MPCC + trials
- EDA expansion
- CARD + trials
- CFM
- EDF + trials
- EDIDP
- CSDP expansion
- New Athena Mechanism

MPCC = Military Planning and Conduct Capability, the EU's first central military HQ, which has decision-making capability in the event of a military emergency declared by the EU Council. UK participating in personnel and structure trials.

EDA = European Defence Agency expansion. UK ministers agreed an expanded budget and hugely-expanded role for the agency, now central to the EU Defence landscape.

CARD = Coordinated Annual Review on Defence. Member states submit defence budget plans and EU/EDA sends back incentivised changes and specialisms. Incredibly the UK has participated in trials since August 2017.

CFM = Cooperative Financial Mechanism. Set up for EDA member to pool finances to build military equipment, but equipment is also controlled jointly via EDA.

EDF = European Defence Fund. Controlled at multiple points by the EU Commission (or its policy) and administered by the EDA. EU Commission has coaxed UK defence companies into large, binding trials with the complicit assistance of the UK Civil Service.

EDIDP = European Defence Industrial Development Programme. Ministers allowed the EU to push this agenda unobstructed via the widening of the EU Defence Directive, the creation of the EDF and adjoining financial mechanisms and the involvement of UK firms, all components of EDIDP.

CSDP = Common Security and Defence Policy. Ministers approved functions which expand its remit. CSDP's effects in the UK include a mandate for the UK Defence College, a division of MOD, to 'promote' CSDP and wider EU Defence in the UK including to MPs and among military staff.

New Athena Mechanism: repayment method for countries brought into EU-designed military operations. Enhanced to make contributions and repayments more formulated and rapid. UK ministers participated in designing and approving in 2017 and the UK is now in this."