Nigel Farage Gets Into Heated Row With Remain Caller Over No-Deal Brexit
20 October 2019, 15:04
In a fiery exchange, Nigel Farage and the pro-Remain caller butted heads over what Brexit means and what its implications could be.
Milan, from Ashford, said: "I'm a Remainer and I'll be doing something quite unpopular. I'll be focusing on scrutiny and details. So I'm hoping you won't suddenly move me on."
He continued: "So, my view is that the Letwin amendment was sensible and proper. Now, if you take a step back, Tusk warned us six months ago 'you've been given a six month extension, do not waste your time'. What's happened?
"Time has been wasted. Boris Johnson had tried to prorogue Parliament, and it wasted so much time and now he's given MPs, what, a day to scrutinise a piece of legislation to have a vote on Saturday?
One MP said grass-cutting rules get more time in council debates than this."
Farage responded: "I have to say on that point, I agree with you. I think It was a deliberate attempt to bounce Parliament into supporting something they hadn't yet read. So on that point, I agree with you.
But don't you think that Letwin's real motive along with what they've what all the Remainers have been doing for months is they want to frustrate the process and the speaker is allowing them to do so."
Milan replied: "They're not frustrating it. There's been no motion to revoke Article 50. So all this nonsense that, as demonstrated by your previous callers, there's a lot of chest beating from Brexiteers but actually no focus on details.
There has been no motion to Revoke Article 50. Now, the major position is that we have to avoid No Deal."
Farage, speaking over an audibly irritated Milan, replied: "Why?The country wants it. It's the most popular. It's the most popular option by far. Oh yeah, absolutely. Clean break Brexit."
Milan asked Nigel to let him speak but Nigel encouraged him to and said "I just corrected you there".
Milan then said: "No, that's wrong because that version of Brexit was never agreed on in 2016. The actual legal implications of a No Deal include no freedom of data, no free movement of goods, no freedom of new services, no benefit from the EU's hundreds of trading cooperation groups, no frictionless trade, no passporting rights, tariffs on exports to the EU.
"No Brexiteer has come out with any details and how we can mitigate the implications of that. I've gone to the Brexit Party website and I've seen absolutely nothing.
So Nigel, I mean, you want to clean Brexit. How do we mitigate the impact with what I just mentioned?"
The pair then began to talk over each other again.
Nigel then said: "You are talking about a lack of definition in the referendum for Leave as you see it. However, the argument was made that No Deal is better than a bad deal. And that argument was made in the referendum.
"Equally, I could say to you... Remain what does that mean? European army? Does it mean United States of Europe? I mean, both of these things are dynamic."
Milan argued that Remain is "the status quo".
Nigel responded: "You're trying to do what Remainers always do. You want this to purely be a study on economic projections. What about democracy, Milan?"
Milan pointed out that it was an "advisory referendum".
Milan asked how we mitigate the legal implications of a No Deal.
Nigel Farage said: "We become an independent country that makes its own laws, controls its own borders, makes its own deals and chooses its own tariffs and we can get people cheaper clothes, cheaper shoes. I mean, what's wrong with that?"
The pair then spoke about different versions of leaving. Nigel then asked how we resolve this.
Milan said that "there's no version of Brexit".
Nigel said: "so we just cancel Brexit?"
Milan clarified that he meant he wanted a referendum which puts Boris Johnson's deal against Remain. He would accept Brexit if the referendum supported Boris Johnson's deal.
He then asked if that "is the version of Brexit that you voted for, Nigel?"
Nigel said no and explained that is why he has an issue with Boris Johnson's deal.