This year's UK general election campaign is the worst that I can remember in my 68 years. The campaign has been infected by lies, promises that cannot or will not be met, bluster and bull shit.
Real facts have been challenged by fake facts. All of the media are reporting unchallenged nonsense.
The BBC has been a disgrace it has not not critically examined the claims of politicians and has not exposed their lies and deceit.
Recently, a BBC journalist challenged the Labour party to provide evidence about the poor behaviour of the 5 large corporations towards their employees - and rightly so. The BBC, however, at no time challenged the lies and deceit over Brexit and the new deal.
The electorate have been cheated. The only parties which are not lying and cheating are in a substantial minority. My vote will be going to the Green Party which attempts to put forward evidence based policies. I particularly like their idea of setting aside 15% of farmland which will be managed to improve the environment for wild life. They are also advocating that each school is twinned with a farm so that children will be able to see agriculture and animal husbandry at first hand and how this should fit into an improved ecology. These are the sort of intelligent, economical and practical measures which should be put forward to the electorate.
If the Conservative party wins they are going to execute a Brexit which will possibly be ruinous to the UK. Our standing in the world will be reduced. We will lose substantial trade agreements with the EU and with all the nations, such as Japan and Canada, which the EU has negotiated for us. Most of our current trading agreements will have to be renegotiated from a weaker position.
Britain will not get a trade agreement with the US unless the NHS is on the table. Britain could end up not having favourable trade arrangements with the EU, the US, Japan and Canada. It is shameful that a government would put us in this position. It is time for all politicians to tell the truth about Britain's future.
What is more shameful is the commercial and political position of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland will be subject to the rules of two customs unions: the UK's and the EU's. Despite what the prime minister says there will be a commercial border between the Northern Ireland and Great Britain. This situation is a terrible mistake and both the UK and the EU could live to regret this. The prime minister has not negotiated a super new deal better than Theresa May's but he has settled for what the EU proposed in the first place. He has caved in to the EU's demands. The loyalist community now know that they have been cheated. Conflict could return to Northern Ireland because of this.
Many people voted for Brexit as they saw this as a means to reduce immigration. If our economy is to thrive then we need immigrants both skilled and unskilled. If immigration stops then the economy, as it is modelled now, will fall into decline. EU citizens are leaving in droves from the NHS, the Finance industry and others: this will have to be reversed. The British people should be told the facts. People coming to our country improve the fabric of our society. They should not be feared and Britain should organise itself to accommodate them.
When we leave the EU there will not be enough money to fund the promises of the two major political parties. The electorate will have been deceived, Bexit voters will suffer the consequences as will Remain voters and those who did not vote. The 13 million of the electorate who did not vote in the referendum still expect the government to act in their interests. The best way for f the government to act in everyone's interests would be either to stay in the EU, or to leave but stay in the Customs Union and Single market. It is not in our national interest to remove ourselves from free trade agreements with the EU, Japan and Canada only to sell our country to the US in exchange.
I hope the electorate will vote wisely but I fear they will not. The slow decline of the UK will start on Friday the 13th.
Wednesday, 11 December 2019
Wednesday, 20 November 2019
The British Political System has descended to a new level of banality
The British system of democracy is in a sad state. The ruling party is sustaining itself by lies and deceit and the worst kinds of fake news on social media. News organisations such as the BBC are afraid to hold the government to account. Recently a government minster announced during an interview with the BBC that Britain was going to plant 30 million trees to improve the environment. He claimed that when Britain leaves the EU it would be free to do so; he was implying that the EU was was holding Britain back. The interviewer should than have followed up with the question "what EU law is preventing Britain from planting these trees?" Of course, there is no such law; the politician was are being allowed to get away with deceit.
The public is being confused by the most egregious propaganda full of deceit and false promises.
The opposition is no better; surely the leader of the Labour party should inform the public what is his personal opinion about Brexit. It is perfectly possible to be open about your opinion and still have the policy of renegotiating the Brexit deal and then asking the public whether they want to proceed with this new Brexit deal or stay in the EU. What is the leader of the opposition frightened of? The public deserve openness and the truth.
Both political parties are promising 10 billion here and 10 billion there: all over the place. This is disingenuous. The nation will not be able to afford any of these promises if it leaves the EU.The economy is dragging along in near recession and leaving the single market and customs union will make matters worse.
If we leave the single market we will probably lose large sections of our industry.
When we leave the EU our power as a medium sized state will be diminished. We will lose the trade deals we have as a result of our membership of the EU. We will lose our deals with Japan and Canada and other larger states; these trade deals will have to be renegotiated to try to maintain the status quo. Our position will be weakened without the EU. By leaving the EU we risk losing trade deals which already cover about 60% of world trade. Leaving the EU is economically stupid. A weakened Great Britain will be at the mercy of China and the US. There will be no free lunches and no extra money to be spent on the NHS, the Police, Social Services or Education.
The Prime Minister has promised that the Brexit transition period will not be extended beyond 31st December 2020. A new free trade deal with the EU will not have been negotiated by then.There is no hope of this being a successful political or economic strategy. In fact it will probably be an political and economic disaster. When we leave the EU we will lose most of our negotiating power. The economic cliff edge will be re-awakened but with a vengeance. Increased tariffs and quotas will be placed on our exports to the EU , Japan and Canada etc and according to WTO rules - so much for our sovereignty. Every lorry will be stopped at Dover and the Channel Tunnel for their documents to be examined. The queues will be tremendous. There will be an economic border between the Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK; a recipe for conflict with the "loyalist" community of Northern Ireland. There will be no mitigation forthcoming from the EU.
All of this is a prospect of economic stagnation and political conflict. Britain will be on its own.
It is quite likely that Scotland will push for a border poll and it will probably be successful this time. The UK will be negotiating to split up before it has finalised an agreement with the EU: another recipe for chaos.
It is time for the major parties to spell out the consequences of Brexit. The promises made to the voters about sovereignty and obeying EU law have already been broken because of the need to placate the EU over the Good Friday Agreement. The promises about ending freedom of movement for EU citizens will also be broken. Britain will have to make concessions over this otherwise we will not be able to negotiate a good free trade agreement, this broken promise will be dressed up in a fudge.
The leave voters have been duped by politicians of both sides. The best course of action would be to remain in the EU. The costs of leaving far outweigh the doubtful benefit - freedom to make trade deals which are worse than we have already got. It is time for politicians to tell the truth and the voting public to wake up. I doubt that this will happen and the slippery slope will get steeper. Britain's democracy is no longer fit for purpose as it allowing this to happen. We need proper constitutional change to improve our political system and democracy otherwise we will sink into the mire.
The public is being confused by the most egregious propaganda full of deceit and false promises.
The opposition is no better; surely the leader of the Labour party should inform the public what is his personal opinion about Brexit. It is perfectly possible to be open about your opinion and still have the policy of renegotiating the Brexit deal and then asking the public whether they want to proceed with this new Brexit deal or stay in the EU. What is the leader of the opposition frightened of? The public deserve openness and the truth.
Both political parties are promising 10 billion here and 10 billion there: all over the place. This is disingenuous. The nation will not be able to afford any of these promises if it leaves the EU.The economy is dragging along in near recession and leaving the single market and customs union will make matters worse.
If we leave the single market we will probably lose large sections of our industry.
When we leave the EU our power as a medium sized state will be diminished. We will lose the trade deals we have as a result of our membership of the EU. We will lose our deals with Japan and Canada and other larger states; these trade deals will have to be renegotiated to try to maintain the status quo. Our position will be weakened without the EU. By leaving the EU we risk losing trade deals which already cover about 60% of world trade. Leaving the EU is economically stupid. A weakened Great Britain will be at the mercy of China and the US. There will be no free lunches and no extra money to be spent on the NHS, the Police, Social Services or Education.
The Prime Minister has promised that the Brexit transition period will not be extended beyond 31st December 2020. A new free trade deal with the EU will not have been negotiated by then.There is no hope of this being a successful political or economic strategy. In fact it will probably be an political and economic disaster. When we leave the EU we will lose most of our negotiating power. The economic cliff edge will be re-awakened but with a vengeance. Increased tariffs and quotas will be placed on our exports to the EU , Japan and Canada etc and according to WTO rules - so much for our sovereignty. Every lorry will be stopped at Dover and the Channel Tunnel for their documents to be examined. The queues will be tremendous. There will be an economic border between the Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK; a recipe for conflict with the "loyalist" community of Northern Ireland. There will be no mitigation forthcoming from the EU.
All of this is a prospect of economic stagnation and political conflict. Britain will be on its own.
It is quite likely that Scotland will push for a border poll and it will probably be successful this time. The UK will be negotiating to split up before it has finalised an agreement with the EU: another recipe for chaos.
It is time for the major parties to spell out the consequences of Brexit. The promises made to the voters about sovereignty and obeying EU law have already been broken because of the need to placate the EU over the Good Friday Agreement. The promises about ending freedom of movement for EU citizens will also be broken. Britain will have to make concessions over this otherwise we will not be able to negotiate a good free trade agreement, this broken promise will be dressed up in a fudge.
The leave voters have been duped by politicians of both sides. The best course of action would be to remain in the EU. The costs of leaving far outweigh the doubtful benefit - freedom to make trade deals which are worse than we have already got. It is time for politicians to tell the truth and the voting public to wake up. I doubt that this will happen and the slippery slope will get steeper. Britain's democracy is no longer fit for purpose as it allowing this to happen. We need proper constitutional change to improve our political system and democracy otherwise we will sink into the mire.
Tuesday, 5 November 2019
The UK is now in a sad state.
All of our friends from continental Europe, the US and Australia think that the UK is bonkers to be leaving the EU. They can see things from the outside and from an objective point of view. They can see what will become of the country when we finally leave the EU. It will become inward looking, more divided, politically and diplomatically weaker and economically weaker. Our friends can see that the UK has made a mistake. They see a country that has lost its self-confidence and which fears strangers rather than despises them. They see a country whose enterprises are owned and driven by Europeans, Americans and former Commonwealth nationals. British people, in the main, no longer have the self-confidence to compete and lead in an ever increasing international environment. Britain is lost and will probably split up: the Great Britain we once new will split up. New enterprises and investment will probably avoid Britain in the future to our social and economic detriment. I am surprised that there has not been a genuine financial crisis yet, but one is surely on the way if the division continues.
Successive governments and opposition parties have been naive. You cannot rule a country by using referendums unless there are checks and balances. Referendums can be very divisive and they should be used sparingly and wisely. An inward looking Britain has not learnt from other countries. Most sensible countries require a super majority before constitutional change is initiated. Most sensible countries make a decision only when the consequences of change are fully and honestly discussed, and they have constitutional courts which can annul a referendum or order a re-run if a campaign has not been run according to constitutional standards.
Australia has compulsory voting which means that everyone must vote. It also has rules which state that constitutional change cannot take place unless 4 out of 6 of its states agree to change, for this reason most referendums since the second world war have failed to institute change. No one complains that they have been cheated , the system ensures that the whole country is happy to accept the result within the rules.
In Britain we decided to hold an advisory referendum based on a first past the post system, which meant that a minority of the public decided that we should change the constitution. Around 17 million voted to leave the EU, 16 million voted to remain and 13 million did not vote. Two of the 4 nations of the UK voted to remain in the EU and 2 voted to leave. The country was and still is completely divided. The decision to leave or remain was not based on the results of an objective assessment made by royal commission or similar body; it was based upon emotion and ideology. You cannot run a successful country like this.
The government and opposition were disingenuous to promise the population they they would implement the result of the referendum. If it was really their wish, then they would have made the result mandatory, in the first place, and we would have left by now. Most MPs , government ministers and opposition leaders know that leaving the EU will create great problems for our country. They have not have the courage to tell the people the result of the referendum should not be adhered to. Many in the population feel their opinion and Brexit should be implemented; they were promised empowerment and they now assume the right to demand it.
It is quite clear that the government's deal will not solve the problems of Brexit. It will probably exacerbate them. Scotland will try for independence. Northern Ireland might try for independence too. If Scotland and Northern Ireland vote for independence,on a first past the post system, where the minority voices of the unionists and non-voters are not considered, then there will be be further division and possible violence. We are on dangerous ground.
I was a remain voter; I am prepared to compromise and leave the EU, but only if the UK stays in the customs union and single market. The single market and customs union will both help to maintain the unity of the UK and its economic well being. It is the common sense solution. Substantial proportions of the population, however, are adamant either to stay in the EU or Leave completely. And a substantial proportion of the population do not have an opinion. This is a recipe for further division.
We are pedalling in the swamp and we must be careful not to sink into it completely. A general election or another referendum may not solve the divisions. A wise choice would be to revoke the referendum result and admit to the mistake. A strong and democratic politician coming into power, such as Winston Churchill,
would admit to the errors and lead us to a solution . The trouble is, we do not have a strong and democratic leader and I fear worse is to come.
Be careful how you vote. Young people: think carefully about your future and be sure to go to the ballot box.
Successive governments and opposition parties have been naive. You cannot rule a country by using referendums unless there are checks and balances. Referendums can be very divisive and they should be used sparingly and wisely. An inward looking Britain has not learnt from other countries. Most sensible countries require a super majority before constitutional change is initiated. Most sensible countries make a decision only when the consequences of change are fully and honestly discussed, and they have constitutional courts which can annul a referendum or order a re-run if a campaign has not been run according to constitutional standards.
Australia has compulsory voting which means that everyone must vote. It also has rules which state that constitutional change cannot take place unless 4 out of 6 of its states agree to change, for this reason most referendums since the second world war have failed to institute change. No one complains that they have been cheated , the system ensures that the whole country is happy to accept the result within the rules.
In Britain we decided to hold an advisory referendum based on a first past the post system, which meant that a minority of the public decided that we should change the constitution. Around 17 million voted to leave the EU, 16 million voted to remain and 13 million did not vote. Two of the 4 nations of the UK voted to remain in the EU and 2 voted to leave. The country was and still is completely divided. The decision to leave or remain was not based on the results of an objective assessment made by royal commission or similar body; it was based upon emotion and ideology. You cannot run a successful country like this.
The government and opposition were disingenuous to promise the population they they would implement the result of the referendum. If it was really their wish, then they would have made the result mandatory, in the first place, and we would have left by now. Most MPs , government ministers and opposition leaders know that leaving the EU will create great problems for our country. They have not have the courage to tell the people the result of the referendum should not be adhered to. Many in the population feel their opinion and Brexit should be implemented; they were promised empowerment and they now assume the right to demand it.
It is quite clear that the government's deal will not solve the problems of Brexit. It will probably exacerbate them. Scotland will try for independence. Northern Ireland might try for independence too. If Scotland and Northern Ireland vote for independence,on a first past the post system, where the minority voices of the unionists and non-voters are not considered, then there will be be further division and possible violence. We are on dangerous ground.
I was a remain voter; I am prepared to compromise and leave the EU, but only if the UK stays in the customs union and single market. The single market and customs union will both help to maintain the unity of the UK and its economic well being. It is the common sense solution. Substantial proportions of the population, however, are adamant either to stay in the EU or Leave completely. And a substantial proportion of the population do not have an opinion. This is a recipe for further division.
We are pedalling in the swamp and we must be careful not to sink into it completely. A general election or another referendum may not solve the divisions. A wise choice would be to revoke the referendum result and admit to the mistake. A strong and democratic politician coming into power, such as Winston Churchill,
would admit to the errors and lead us to a solution . The trouble is, we do not have a strong and democratic leader and I fear worse is to come.
Be careful how you vote. Young people: think carefully about your future and be sure to go to the ballot box.
Thursday, 24 October 2019
Brexit and Northern Ireland
The UK government, the government of the Irish republic (ROI) , the European Commission and the European Council have made a grave mistake by negotiating new terms for Northern Ireland regarding Brexit. They have all responded recklessly and they have collectively jeopardised the 1998 Belfast Agreement. It is no wonder that the Democratic Unionists Party of Northern Ireland (NI) are fuming mad.
The UK and the EU have agreed that a simple majority in the Northern Ireland assembly can authorise the Brexit arrangements for NI. This means that the Unionist community can be overridden in the NI Assembly, by a Nationalist majority, and that their voice can be silenced related to trade and single market arrangements for the province. The Belfast Agreement specifically states that there must be the parallel agreement of both the Nationalist and Unionist representatives before major changes are implemented. What change could be more important than the constitutional relationship between NI, the EU and Great Britain.
Northern Ireland was promised that no border between the province and mainland Great Britain would ever be imposed by a British Government, but this is exactly what has happened with the new EU/UK withdrawal agreement. According to the terms of the agreement this will be imposed initially without the full consent of the NI Assembly. NI has been sold down the river.
British and EU politicians would do well to consider what happened in NI before the the 1998 Belfast Agreement: over 3,500 people lost their lives in what almost became all out civil war. That is thousands of Protestants, Catholics, Police and Soldiers who were murdered by both sides in the troubles.
British and EU politicians would also do well to consider how the Troubles between 1969 and 1998 started in NI. Initially, British troops were sent in to protect the Catholic community from protestant rioters. Very quickly the IRA rose up against the presence of the British Army and the Nationalist community started to resent the troops who had been sent in to guard them. The IRA and Ulster loyalist paramilitary groups then started bombing and shooting campaigns. Small sections of both communities took up arms to provoke violent disorder. The loss of innocent lives was dreadful.
The concept of the Belfast Agreement was to promote peace by ensuring that one community could not dominate the other. It also promoted connexions between the ROI, GB and NI, all within the context of the UK and the ROI being part of the EU. Wresting NI from the EU will jeopardise the peace and most people in NI recognise this, that is why they voted by 55% to 45% to remain in the EU.
The Unionist community in NI feels strongly that their country should remain in the the UK. They feel this just as strongly as the Nationalists who yearn for a united Ireland. The Unionists will now feel that they have been treated unfavourably. They will have a justifiable grievance against the British and Irish governments who have effectively shafted them. Peace in Northern Ireland can only be guaranteed by treating both communities fairly and equitably.
The Belfast Agreement was only a staging post to permanent peace in Northern Ireland. Communities are still severely divided and most children go to schools that are either Catholic or Protestant ones.
The Chief of Police of NI has warned that the province could easily slip back into violence on the streets if the Unionists feel that Brexit will be the cause of a united Ireland against their will.
We cannot afford to allow Northern Ireland to slip back into the division and violence of the 1960's and 1970's. The new Withdrawal Agreement could easily result in violent demonstrations on the streets, if ideological sections of the Unionist community feel cheated upon and threatened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-50157743
No responsibly UK MP should support the NI clauses of the new EU Withdrawal Agreement, it would be to the shame of the UK parliament if they allow the Unionist community to be treated so shoddily. I hope that members of the European Parliament recognise this too.
There is only one way for the impasse to be resolved, and that is for the whole of the UK to remain in the EU Customs Union and possibly the Single Market. This way would mean no borders between NI, the ROI and GB. There will then be no need to change the constitutional arrangements for NI. The peace will then be more secure.
Better still why not revoke Brexit? This shambles of a project to reduce everyone's rights and standards could only ever be a dog fight.
As I have said previously, the UK's power will be seriously weakened by Brexit, and this is witnessed by the ROI's insistence that the UK should agree to the EU's original proposal of a border between GB and NI just to preserve an open border in Ireland. Britain will be better off staying in the EU.
The EU, now, is the glue that holds the UK together and is the only way that the UK can prevent itself from being bullied by powers much stronger than Ireland.
It would be unforgivable if Brexit led to a return to violence in NI. All UK citizens should consider this. My compatriots please wise up.
The UK and the EU have agreed that a simple majority in the Northern Ireland assembly can authorise the Brexit arrangements for NI. This means that the Unionist community can be overridden in the NI Assembly, by a Nationalist majority, and that their voice can be silenced related to trade and single market arrangements for the province. The Belfast Agreement specifically states that there must be the parallel agreement of both the Nationalist and Unionist representatives before major changes are implemented. What change could be more important than the constitutional relationship between NI, the EU and Great Britain.
Northern Ireland was promised that no border between the province and mainland Great Britain would ever be imposed by a British Government, but this is exactly what has happened with the new EU/UK withdrawal agreement. According to the terms of the agreement this will be imposed initially without the full consent of the NI Assembly. NI has been sold down the river.
British and EU politicians would do well to consider what happened in NI before the the 1998 Belfast Agreement: over 3,500 people lost their lives in what almost became all out civil war. That is thousands of Protestants, Catholics, Police and Soldiers who were murdered by both sides in the troubles.
British and EU politicians would also do well to consider how the Troubles between 1969 and 1998 started in NI. Initially, British troops were sent in to protect the Catholic community from protestant rioters. Very quickly the IRA rose up against the presence of the British Army and the Nationalist community started to resent the troops who had been sent in to guard them. The IRA and Ulster loyalist paramilitary groups then started bombing and shooting campaigns. Small sections of both communities took up arms to provoke violent disorder. The loss of innocent lives was dreadful.
The concept of the Belfast Agreement was to promote peace by ensuring that one community could not dominate the other. It also promoted connexions between the ROI, GB and NI, all within the context of the UK and the ROI being part of the EU. Wresting NI from the EU will jeopardise the peace and most people in NI recognise this, that is why they voted by 55% to 45% to remain in the EU.
The Unionist community in NI feels strongly that their country should remain in the the UK. They feel this just as strongly as the Nationalists who yearn for a united Ireland. The Unionists will now feel that they have been treated unfavourably. They will have a justifiable grievance against the British and Irish governments who have effectively shafted them. Peace in Northern Ireland can only be guaranteed by treating both communities fairly and equitably.
The Belfast Agreement was only a staging post to permanent peace in Northern Ireland. Communities are still severely divided and most children go to schools that are either Catholic or Protestant ones.
The Chief of Police of NI has warned that the province could easily slip back into violence on the streets if the Unionists feel that Brexit will be the cause of a united Ireland against their will.
We cannot afford to allow Northern Ireland to slip back into the division and violence of the 1960's and 1970's. The new Withdrawal Agreement could easily result in violent demonstrations on the streets, if ideological sections of the Unionist community feel cheated upon and threatened.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-50157743
No responsibly UK MP should support the NI clauses of the new EU Withdrawal Agreement, it would be to the shame of the UK parliament if they allow the Unionist community to be treated so shoddily. I hope that members of the European Parliament recognise this too.
There is only one way for the impasse to be resolved, and that is for the whole of the UK to remain in the EU Customs Union and possibly the Single Market. This way would mean no borders between NI, the ROI and GB. There will then be no need to change the constitutional arrangements for NI. The peace will then be more secure.
Better still why not revoke Brexit? This shambles of a project to reduce everyone's rights and standards could only ever be a dog fight.
As I have said previously, the UK's power will be seriously weakened by Brexit, and this is witnessed by the ROI's insistence that the UK should agree to the EU's original proposal of a border between GB and NI just to preserve an open border in Ireland. Britain will be better off staying in the EU.
The EU, now, is the glue that holds the UK together and is the only way that the UK can prevent itself from being bullied by powers much stronger than Ireland.
It would be unforgivable if Brexit led to a return to violence in NI. All UK citizens should consider this. My compatriots please wise up.
Friday, 11 October 2019
Poor old Badger
The latest scientific report to analyse the efficacy of the badger cull, in the UK west country, concludes that at best the cull has had a marginal effect on the spread of bovine TB, and at worst the spread of this serous cattle disease is made worse. The results of the report are summarised here.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49938943.
The government and the farming community have repeatedly ignored the scientific evidence. Bovine TB is mostly spread by poor animal husbandry. The disease is spread from cattle to wildlife and some wild species then harbour the disease. Poor cattle husbandry has allowed bovine TB to infect the population of wild badgers and other species.
The government's response has simply been block-headed, and their response is being egged on by farmers who are unwilling to accept the facts. Emotion is dominating evidence and reason. This is becoming increasingly apparent.
The cull is causing unnecessary distress and pain to the badgers. A civilised society should not be turning to the gun to solve problems. I am not advocating direct action by any members of the public to halt this cruel culling but I recommend you that you use your vote and purchasing power carefully.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49938943.
The government and the farming community have repeatedly ignored the scientific evidence. Bovine TB is mostly spread by poor animal husbandry. The disease is spread from cattle to wildlife and some wild species then harbour the disease. Poor cattle husbandry has allowed bovine TB to infect the population of wild badgers and other species.
The government's response has simply been block-headed, and their response is being egged on by farmers who are unwilling to accept the facts. Emotion is dominating evidence and reason. This is becoming increasingly apparent.
The cull is causing unnecessary distress and pain to the badgers. A civilised society should not be turning to the gun to solve problems. I am not advocating direct action by any members of the public to halt this cruel culling but I recommend you that you use your vote and purchasing power carefully.
Monday, 9 September 2019
Vote of No Confidence in UK Government
Support for a national coalition in the UK parliament is in the making. Quite rightly, the opposition in the House of Commons has taken control of the legislative programme. They have been able to stop a general election. A general election would mean that parliament is dissolved. To dissolve parliament at such a critical time in the negotiations with the EU would be completely irresponsible - how would the government be held to account?
Equally, proroguing parliament is irresponsible but it offers the opportunity for a recall, if all else is lost.
There is considerable opposition to a "no-deal Brexit" and MPs could stop this if they had the mind to. However, the united opposition are now obliged to present an alternative way forward.
It is apparent that the Government has no plan for the economy, the internal relations between the nations of the UK or the UK's external relations. They have no plan for what happens if we leave with or without a deal or remain. They are behaving recklessly; much to the shock of our EU partners and our allies such as Canada and Japan. The united opposition must develop a mitigation policy and present it to the public.
Ireland is one of the major stumbling blocks. There are really only two solutions to this impasse, and these are either to remain in the EU or to leave but stay in the single market and customs union. To propose a solution that Northern Ireland should remain in the single market and customs union, while the rest of the UK leaves both institutions will be to court disaster. The protestant population of Northern Ireland will not accept this.
Parliament should not accept "closing" either the border between the North and South of Ireland or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. The potential for dissension would be great and could lead to violence returning to Northern Ireland: violence which could emanate from either or both of the competing communities. We have seen a mortar bomb planted in Northern Ireland today. Britain plays with Northern Ireland politics at its peril - borders mean troubles and a possible return to violence.
Scotland is also another stumbling block: if Britain leaves the EU without a deal, and against Scotland's wishes then there will be a new demand for a border poll. This time a referendum for Scotland to leave the UK will succeed. How is the remaining part of Britain going to negotiate a deal with the EU, whilst at the same time negotiating a deal with Scotland to leave the UK? This would create more problems.
Leave aside the economic difficulties: Britain will be weakened diplomatically if it leaves the EU: it will need a new strategy. Being part of the EU gives us power. If we leave the EU, then Malta will be more powerful than us - think about it.
The new united opposition must plan for a way forward. It should plan to revoke Article 50. If it cannot bring itself to do this, then it must agree with the EU that we remain in the single market and customs union. The latter solution will mitigate the effects on our economy and will go some way to solving the political difficulties surrounding Ireland and Scotland.
Leaving the EU without a deal cannot mitigate the damage that will be done to our power on the world stage. This damage will lead to further economic difficulties when we try to replace all the trade deals that we lose from leaving the customs union. We will also be at the economic mercy of the United States.
The united opposition should be ready to vote the government out of office and install a new prime minister to head a temporary government which will act in the national interest. Of course this premier must have his or her power limited. This could be done by a formal agreement but no one party could be dominant because it would not have a majority in parliament. The united opposition is obliged to act, but will it have the courage to do so and save our country from a potential disaster?
Equally, proroguing parliament is irresponsible but it offers the opportunity for a recall, if all else is lost.
There is considerable opposition to a "no-deal Brexit" and MPs could stop this if they had the mind to. However, the united opposition are now obliged to present an alternative way forward.
It is apparent that the Government has no plan for the economy, the internal relations between the nations of the UK or the UK's external relations. They have no plan for what happens if we leave with or without a deal or remain. They are behaving recklessly; much to the shock of our EU partners and our allies such as Canada and Japan. The united opposition must develop a mitigation policy and present it to the public.
Ireland is one of the major stumbling blocks. There are really only two solutions to this impasse, and these are either to remain in the EU or to leave but stay in the single market and customs union. To propose a solution that Northern Ireland should remain in the single market and customs union, while the rest of the UK leaves both institutions will be to court disaster. The protestant population of Northern Ireland will not accept this.
Parliament should not accept "closing" either the border between the North and South of Ireland or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. The potential for dissension would be great and could lead to violence returning to Northern Ireland: violence which could emanate from either or both of the competing communities. We have seen a mortar bomb planted in Northern Ireland today. Britain plays with Northern Ireland politics at its peril - borders mean troubles and a possible return to violence.
Scotland is also another stumbling block: if Britain leaves the EU without a deal, and against Scotland's wishes then there will be a new demand for a border poll. This time a referendum for Scotland to leave the UK will succeed. How is the remaining part of Britain going to negotiate a deal with the EU, whilst at the same time negotiating a deal with Scotland to leave the UK? This would create more problems.
Leave aside the economic difficulties: Britain will be weakened diplomatically if it leaves the EU: it will need a new strategy. Being part of the EU gives us power. If we leave the EU, then Malta will be more powerful than us - think about it.
The new united opposition must plan for a way forward. It should plan to revoke Article 50. If it cannot bring itself to do this, then it must agree with the EU that we remain in the single market and customs union. The latter solution will mitigate the effects on our economy and will go some way to solving the political difficulties surrounding Ireland and Scotland.
Leaving the EU without a deal cannot mitigate the damage that will be done to our power on the world stage. This damage will lead to further economic difficulties when we try to replace all the trade deals that we lose from leaving the customs union. We will also be at the economic mercy of the United States.
The united opposition should be ready to vote the government out of office and install a new prime minister to head a temporary government which will act in the national interest. Of course this premier must have his or her power limited. This could be done by a formal agreement but no one party could be dominant because it would not have a majority in parliament. The united opposition is obliged to act, but will it have the courage to do so and save our country from a potential disaster?
Friday, 9 August 2019
No confidence vote against government in UK parliament
Why is Parliament agonising about having a no confidence vote against the government over Brexit. Let them sort out the mess they created. The present ministerial incumbents advocated Brexit and won an advisory referendum; there was no constitutional or legal obligation upon the UK government to invoke Article 50.
The legal process to approve the invocation of Article 50 was approved by Parliament. Parliament failed to ratify the EU withdrawal agreement and set the UK on a path to intense economic difficulties and the probable break up of the UK. Parliament, therefore , compounded the government's error.
The UK will also be faced with legal problems with its relationship with the EU. It also faces diplomatic weakness in its relations with the EU, the US and China. Young British citizens of the UK ,who do not enjoy dual nationality, will be deprived of their liberty to work, live and love in the 27 remaining countries of the EU; and this is for me the most depressing aspect of Brexit.
No-one who voted leave can provide a cogent and rational argument for how the UK can benefit from Brexit. The cost benefit analysis is heavily weighted in the cost column for diplomatic, legal, economic and social continuity and coherence. Most of the benefits are either marginal or are outweighed by the averse factors.
The best course of action would be for the UK Parliament to forget about a vote of confidence or a general election until either Brexit is revoked or delayed until a less damaging alternative is organised. I voted to remain but I would be prepared to compromise by voting for Britain to remain in the single market which I have advocated before. We could also remain in the customs union, and attempt to negotiate a say on who the union negotiate preferential trade deals with and their terms. My preference would be for a revoke decision, but I would be prepared to compromise as above. Ardent leavers have got no intention of compromising.
Staying in the single market and customs union would alleviate some of the adverse effects of Brexit but not all of them. We will still lose overseas investors and see our position as a middle ranking world power reduced. However, a disaster will be averted.
Parliament should concentrate their time between now and October 31st on passing a law either to revoke article 50 or amend the EU Withdrawal Act - this would mean Parliament deciding and ratifying when the date of withdrawal from the EU would be effected. Amending the act would give time for a third referendum or a realistic compromise or both.
To do this, Parliamentarians need to have the courage to admit that they were wrong to invoke Article 50 in the first place.
They should explain why sensible countries require a two thirds majority to invoke a change to the status quo. They should explain why in Australia a general referendum result can only be effected if a majority of the states vote for it. In Australia voting is compulsory, so a first past the post result is truly representative of all of the electorate. These prior factors are reasons why Australia is able to hold referendums without causing division and dissension in the body politic of the whole of the federation and individual states. These are also reasons why most referendums in Australia fail to change the status quo.
The fixed Parliament Act states that the PM can only call a general election when is there is a two thirds majority in Parliament to approve it. I wonder why a two thirds majority is needed? Also, if the opposition do not approve a vote of no confidence then the government is forced to stay in office. The government could easily be held to account to sort out the mess of their own making. Britain would remain in the EU until a sensible solution is found.
However, MP's will not have the courage to do this and we will probably leave the EU by default without a deal and our country will be the worse for it.
From a personal point of view, my wife and I have the resources and the passports to leave the UK to take up residence in one of the other 27 remaining EU countries. We both have extreme affection for the UK and its tradition of tolerance and liberty. The situation would have to get considerably worse, in our eyes, before we up sticks and left. Luckily, and as a last resort, we can emigrate; but the vast majority of our compatriots will be deprived of this right. Moving to the US or Australia is becoming increasing difficult. Voting to remove the right to free movement maybe something that leavers will regret, either for themselves or for their children. The blue passport will end up just being that: Blue.
The legal process to approve the invocation of Article 50 was approved by Parliament. Parliament failed to ratify the EU withdrawal agreement and set the UK on a path to intense economic difficulties and the probable break up of the UK. Parliament, therefore , compounded the government's error.
The UK will also be faced with legal problems with its relationship with the EU. It also faces diplomatic weakness in its relations with the EU, the US and China. Young British citizens of the UK ,who do not enjoy dual nationality, will be deprived of their liberty to work, live and love in the 27 remaining countries of the EU; and this is for me the most depressing aspect of Brexit.
No-one who voted leave can provide a cogent and rational argument for how the UK can benefit from Brexit. The cost benefit analysis is heavily weighted in the cost column for diplomatic, legal, economic and social continuity and coherence. Most of the benefits are either marginal or are outweighed by the averse factors.
The best course of action would be for the UK Parliament to forget about a vote of confidence or a general election until either Brexit is revoked or delayed until a less damaging alternative is organised. I voted to remain but I would be prepared to compromise by voting for Britain to remain in the single market which I have advocated before. We could also remain in the customs union, and attempt to negotiate a say on who the union negotiate preferential trade deals with and their terms. My preference would be for a revoke decision, but I would be prepared to compromise as above. Ardent leavers have got no intention of compromising.
Staying in the single market and customs union would alleviate some of the adverse effects of Brexit but not all of them. We will still lose overseas investors and see our position as a middle ranking world power reduced. However, a disaster will be averted.
Parliament should concentrate their time between now and October 31st on passing a law either to revoke article 50 or amend the EU Withdrawal Act - this would mean Parliament deciding and ratifying when the date of withdrawal from the EU would be effected. Amending the act would give time for a third referendum or a realistic compromise or both.
To do this, Parliamentarians need to have the courage to admit that they were wrong to invoke Article 50 in the first place.
They should explain why sensible countries require a two thirds majority to invoke a change to the status quo. They should explain why in Australia a general referendum result can only be effected if a majority of the states vote for it. In Australia voting is compulsory, so a first past the post result is truly representative of all of the electorate. These prior factors are reasons why Australia is able to hold referendums without causing division and dissension in the body politic of the whole of the federation and individual states. These are also reasons why most referendums in Australia fail to change the status quo.
The fixed Parliament Act states that the PM can only call a general election when is there is a two thirds majority in Parliament to approve it. I wonder why a two thirds majority is needed? Also, if the opposition do not approve a vote of no confidence then the government is forced to stay in office. The government could easily be held to account to sort out the mess of their own making. Britain would remain in the EU until a sensible solution is found.
However, MP's will not have the courage to do this and we will probably leave the EU by default without a deal and our country will be the worse for it.
From a personal point of view, my wife and I have the resources and the passports to leave the UK to take up residence in one of the other 27 remaining EU countries. We both have extreme affection for the UK and its tradition of tolerance and liberty. The situation would have to get considerably worse, in our eyes, before we up sticks and left. Luckily, and as a last resort, we can emigrate; but the vast majority of our compatriots will be deprived of this right. Moving to the US or Australia is becoming increasing difficult. Voting to remove the right to free movement maybe something that leavers will regret, either for themselves or for their children. The blue passport will end up just being that: Blue.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
