Brexit White Paper: Time to get tough on Europe, says Telford MP Lucy Allan

Lucy Allan said it is time for those on the continent to stop “sneering at Britain and those that voted to leave the EU”.

The MP backed Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit white paper, released last night, which lays out plans for the split.

But the country must be prepared to walk away with a no-deal if the EU attempts to “water down” the plans, Ms Allan said.

“Leave voters cast their vote in good faith,” she said. “They have a right to be heard and respected. It is time to get tough with Europe. They cannot go on sneering at Britain and Brexit voters."

Meanwhile, Shrewsbury MP Daniel Kawczynski labelled parts of the Prime Minister’s Brexit plan “deeply worrying” and North Shropshire MP Owen Paterson warned he would vote against Mrs May's plan, unless it is better than the terms of no-deal.

• Scroll down for more on the Brexit White Paper from Shropshire MPs

Ms Allan said: “Telford is a town where 67 per cent voted leave and it relies on supply chain jobs and advanced manufacturing.

"I want to make sure that Brexit is delivered and delivered without threat to jobs. I believe the PM’s proposals achieve that.

“There must be no watering down of these proposals. To that end we need to prepare for a no deal, in the event the EU rejects the plans.”

Ms Allan said the Prime Minister had a hard job ahead of her but backed her to lead the process, saying any other leader would face the same challenges.

Reality

"The simple facts are that there is no majority in Parliament for the Conservative Party and there is no majority in Parliament for Brexit. All leave supporters have to accept this reality and recognise that this makes delivering Brexit that much harder," she said.

"And it’s not just Parliament that is opposed to Brexit. Business, the media, the judiciary – the Prime Minister is not in a position to ignore all dissenting voices. She has to play the cards she has been dealt.

"A leadership election now, or even another General Election does not bring Brexit any closer, nor would it bring about a better Brexit. There is no appetite in Parliament for either. A new leader or new government would face the exact same set of challenges as the Prime Minister faces, the exact same opposing voices.

"As we near the end of the negotiation period, now is the time to back the Prime Minister so she can deliver the best Brexit possible."

Mrs May's plans include allowing EU workers to temporarily come to Britain without a visa, and that businesses should be able to move their talented people from the UK to the European Union and vice versa post-Brexit.

It calls for an end to free movement, but said the depth of the relationship and close ties between the peoples of the UK and the EU should be recognised.

Shropshire MPs have their say

Daniel Kawczynski, Shrewsbury MP

Just yesterday afternoon I, and my colleagues in Parliament, received a copy of the Government’s White Paper on the Future Relationship Between the United Kingdom and the European Union. Over the coming days I will be carefully considering its contents.

I am encouraged that the Cabinet has come together to support the Prime Minister’s plan for Brexit and I commend her for this achievement. However, from what I have seen so far from the Paper, there are elements that I find deeply worrying. Anything that prevents us from signing our own bespoke trade agreements, making our own judgements over laws and regulations or managing immigration on our own terms dilutes Brexit and that is not what the people voted for. I will be paying close attention to whether these points can be addressed.

I am well aware of the parliamentary arithmetic, so I know full well the challenge that faces the Prime Minister. I will be working with colleagues in Government, the Party and the European Research Group to find a way forward that balances what is pragmatically achievable with honouring the result of the referendum.

My view has always been that we should be more ambitious than the Government has been so far and I believe we are actually in a far stronger negotiating position than we realise. We are one of the top net-contributors to the EU budget after all. Of course, this is a negotiation and I worry as we negotiate further, we will move further and further from a clean Brexit. The more that happens the less and less I feel I can support it.

I campaigned for and voted for Brexit. I want nothing less than a complete break with the EU so we can fully regain control of our money, borders and laws.

My hope is still that the Government can deliver this and I wish the new Secretary of State, Dominic Raab, all the best for this endeavour. My decision on whether the Government has my support on this depends if they can reassure me that these core elements of the Brexit we voted for can be realised. I will look for these reassurances in the coming days.

Owen Paterson, North Shropshire MP

The Chequers proposal falls well short of a clean, free-trading Brexit by leaving the Single Market, the Customs Union and the jurisdiction of the European Court promised by the Conservative Manifesto.

It would force significant sections of the UK economy to follow EU laws.

It would severely limit our ability to form new trading relationships.

It would see the European Court continue to have jurisdiction in the UK.

Compare that to World Trade Organisation terms.

As a full member of the WTO in our own right, we would have the power to shape on global regulations alongside our allies.

We would begin to use the vast amounts of money which we send to the EU on our own priorities, withdrawing our offer of a £39 billion “divorce bill”.

Recognising that 90 per cent of economic growth over the next decade will be outside the EU, we would negotiate free-trade deals with many countries around the world.

We would set our own regulatory framework, tailored to the needs of 100 per cent of our economy, not just the 12 per cent involved in exports to the EU. We would pass our own laws to meet our own requirements.

The benefits of this new approach would be significant.

The costs of EU regulation are felt by all consumers and we could commit to lowering their costs of living by using our freedom to remove tariffs.

This, many senior economists predict, would reduce consumer costs by eight per cent. With the latest ONS figures putting the average weekly household bill at £554.20, that means an annual saving of £2,300 per household.

The EU Withdrawal Act means European law will cease to apply to the UK on exit day. Under the Chequers agreement, the Government will have to reinstate large chunks of EU law and Parliament will have to vote on it. My criterion is simple: unless the Government’s proposal is better than WTO terms, I will vote against it.