Brexit all done and dusted?

Whitewave the truth is beginning to dawn but whether will change the government's outlook remains to be seen. Until the Election is over we really cannot say very much.

The main question which one person on Question Time was not answered definitively is

"If the after negotiations it becomes evident that Brexit is not viable would you be prepared to stay in the EU?"

There is no point in throwing the baby out with the bath water. Parliament should at least consider this option and not be intimidated by the 52% many of whom have changed their minds or misled back in 2016. The result of the election will give us a clue of how thw country actually feels.

Jalima You're not ignorant, so I won't excuse you.

You're correct that the exit polls for the referendum showed that few 18-24 year olds voted in person and this was widely reported. However, subsequent face-to-face interviews and online polls since then have asked young people whether they voted. Of course, they might be lying, but many claimed that they had voted by post. The reason for a high percentage of postal votes is obvious. The referendum took place during the Summer break and many students weren't living where they were registered. My DD was one of them. I actually posted her envelope, so I know she voted.

The 18-24 cohort is one of the smallest, so even if they had all voted, their 70+% pro-Remain vote wouldn't have counted, because the baby boomer cohort is so much bigger. Maybe that's one reason so many 18-24 year olds are disaffected with politics.

I'm not so sure that the election will give a clue about how the country feels on a single issue.

The Labour Party is (at best) ambivalent about its stance and there's no way of telling if people vote for the Conservatives for Brexit, because they can't stand Corbyn or some other different reason.

However, I agree with Cindersdad. The latest polls are consistently showing a small pro-Remain majority and increasing slightly (probably as more 17 year olds turn 18).

That is an interesting statistical point daphnedil and one that had escaped me, about the size of the cohorts. (If it escaped me though, I doubt it is in the minds of the under 25s when they are deciding whether they can be arsed to vote)
It may well be correct that if all the 18-24 year olds had voted in the referendum the result would have been the same However if you expanded the band to under 30s the story might have been very different.
In our constituency the retired age group is nearly 25% of the entire population so must make up a sizeable % of all the voters. And they are more likely to vote. However it is very marginal. It could come down to 10s of votes. If a few more younger people vote it could make the difference. So that is what I'll be doing for the rest of the day, trying to get younger people to register to vote.

The rest of the day?
They won't be up yet, Jess, having read what time you posted that.

The referendum took place at the same time as Glastonbury - GS and his friends who realised this all voted by post.

Well by the time I'd faffed about and got organised they were

Did you get any to sign up, Jess?

Make sure you get as many as you can signed up. Hopefully they will all vote Labour.

There are still too many people who think they can buy the British vote. I thought it wasn't allowed this close to the election. There is a limit to how much can be spent by each candidate. I am sure the Tories have spent all their head office allowance already.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/13/millionaire-brexit-donor-targets-remain-mps

In fact the whole of the electoral system needs overhauling if someone is openly able to claim that he can spend £2.5 million on buying votes for Brexit.
The electoral commission should be looking into this now.

Durhamjen hwat you say is quite correct. The political system is broken BUT IT SUITS THE TORIES as it is. Until we get proper PR we are hostages to the system. After the election, whatever the result, I intend to email EVERY MP with my concerns. I may get dismissed as a Grumbling Twit but a host of Grumbling Twits cannot be ignored. I will publish the text of my multiple Email in this forum and anyone will be able to forward, adapt or ignore it as they see fit.

Brexit must be revisited as I have said countless times in this and other threads.

What a task you have taken on to email the MPs - but I agree about the system. I still think there is something we do not know about the referendum etc because so much is coming out showing it was basically illegal and nothing is done.
I wonder what historians will think about it all in years to come - maybe conclude that they put something in the water!!

brexitexpress.co.uk/about/

Open letter from the man who thinks he can buy votes and MPs.

Well done Cindersdad. I will be very interested to see the response. I have already written to my Tory MP who was complaining about the large SNP contingent in the HOC. I pointed out that it was the absurd FPTP system which put them there in such numbers and asked if he would support PR.

He did actually reply (he is standing again and wants my vote) and told me - surprise, surprise, that he preferred FPTP.

We only have a two party system because of FPTP. Although there have always been individual MPs in Tory and Labour parties, they have never been able to persuade their colleagues. The result has been (with the exception of the 2010-2015 coalition) an alternating series of governments whose main aim is to grab power for their own party and reverse everything their predecessors did, no matter how much damage was done to the country.

"Brexit Express will make funding available to Conservative candidates in those constituencies, up to a limit of £5,000 each. The aggregate donation, whatever it turns out to be, will be reported to the Electoral Commission as a donation to the Conservative Party by Mr Jeremy Hosking."

Anyone who wants to, can make donations to a political party.
If this man gives money to specific candidates, though, shouldn't that be recorded separately as being received into those candidates' funds?

Yes thank you Jen. And interesting that most of the students were signed up. Now all they have to do is remember to vote.

You'll have to remind them all on the Wednesday!

I watched a very interesting discussion about banking and inequality last night. The video is below the blog text and wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea as it is quite dry and involves experts (though I do recommend it)

renegadeinc.com/the-finance-curse/

One of the experts was Richard Verner, a professor of international finance and banking.He made a very interesting point. He said that the City of London is not legally part of the UK (the Queen can only enter it with permission!) and is therefore not in the EU!

That would shake up Brexit negotiations on the financial sector somewhat

(though I wonder how this is worked around in real life..)

Maizie, there are only three clauses of the Magna Carta in use today and one is about the freedom of the city of London.

"Taxes and Tolls. The City obtained exemption from various taxes (scot and lot, danegeld) as well as fines (murdrum, childwite, jeresgive, scotale, miskenning). It also gained the right to pay the same tallage and aids as other citizens as well as an exemption from tolls and a maximum sum for amercements;
Judicial Rights. The City obtained the right to be tried by their own courts, that is, ‘within the walls’. Also, freedom from ‘wager by battle’ as well as the rights of infangthef, outfangthef, escheat, waifs, estrays and treasure trove. Also, certain legal rights distinct from the common law in respect of: lands, promises, debts, wills as well as orphans, apprentices, feme sole, hostlers and defamatory words. The mayor and aldermen obtained the right to be justices of the peace (JP’s) and the mayor, a justice of goal delivery and of oyer and terminer;
War and Billeting. The City obtained exemption from being compelled to provide troops for war outside the City and to be free of billeting;
Officials. The City obtained the right to appoint a mayor, sheriffs, chamberlain, common clerk and common sarjeant. Provision was also made for the annual election of aldermen;
Offices of the Mayor. The mayor obtained the offices of : escheator, bailiff of the Thames, admiral of the port of London, clerk of the market, keeper of the great beam, gauger of merchandise, outroper, coroner, registrar of pawns, custodian of Bedlam, assistant to the butler at the coronation and lord lieutenant;
Merchants and Markets. The City obtained the right to impose various restrictions on merchants as well as brokers. Also, the right to have: their own clerk of the market, courts of piepowder, market overt and freedom for purveyance. Further, the ability to impose: charges on the weighing, carriage, survey (ie. inspection) and the measurement of goods and coals;
Miscellaneous. The City obtained the right to bear maces of gold and silver. Also, confirmation of their hunting rights."

I wonder how much hunting is done within the city walls.

How I love 'infangthef' and 'outfangthef'

Thanks dj

Blimey!

The City of London’s strange history

www.ft.com/content/7c8f24fa-3aa5-11e4-bd08-00144feabdc0

Yes, Maizie, there are a few words there that you wish hadn't gone out of favour.
Not many piepowder courts any more, unless trial by GN is the modern equivalent?

The Corporation of London is not my idea of a commune!

www.theweek.co.uk/brexit/81116/uk-suppliers-being-hit-by-brexit-and-jobs-will-go