Posted Oct 18, 2019 by Martin Armstrong
COMMENT: You and Maggie could have solved BREXIT in a week!
REPLY: She would have done precisely that. Of course, they staged a coup against her to take the UK into the euro. She was not against the EU as long as it remained a trade union. We had discussions on that subject. Maggie said at the Bruges Speech:
“We have not successfully rolled back the frontiers of the state in Britain, only to see them reimposed at a European level with a European superstate exercising a new dominance from Brussels.”
While some people are claiming she would NEVER have had a referendum, that is total nonsense. Her Poll Tax was to make people have a stake in government and then they would vote and pay attention. That was her true motive behind that step which nobody understood and it backfired on her.
She was against the euro and the federalization of Europe; she would MOST DEFINITELY move to exit the EU under these terms. She would NEVER have agreed to surrender the sovereignty of Britain.
The idea of the euro was born at the Plaza Accord in 1985. The purpose was to create a single currency to compete against the dollar. It was James Baker’s idea that if there was a single European currency, then the dollar would not be the main currency and it would not rise excessively. Nigel Lawson was a big supporter of joining the euro at that time. The entire Plaza Accord and then the Louvre Accord were all about managing the dollar value in FOREX markets.
Using her Bruges Speech and trying to twist things around that she would have been against a referendum and would be in the remain camp is TOTAL nonsense. We had deep discussions about the problems with the euro. The commission designing the euro came to our WEC in London. I met with them about the structural design of the euro. I think I knew where this went all wrong and I knew where Maggie stood. She also respected that I was one of the leading currency specialists on the subject with real experience and not just theories.