An outsider's view of British politics

How an the EU negotiate when we still don't know what we want. Not even one Party - with both main parties totally divided still? Impossible, as he says quite clearly:

www.facebook.com/GuyVerhofstadt/videos/386412598827338/

People in EU and EEA countries, like the Queen, often ask why the different parties in the UK can't work together, and find common ground and be more pragmatic.

It is easier to be pragmatic if you are not directly affected in so many ways. If you have just lost your job because your employer has relocated abroad, it is perhaps more difficult to be calm and positive about the benefits.

But this is also an illustration of the British two party system- where the First Past the Post system of election creates 'strong' governement in most instances- and where a very large proportion of the population is just ignored and feels totally unrepresented, like me. And also lead to very destructive see-saw politics.

This is really exarcebated at the moment, as the Labour Party is not opposing effectively the Conservatives, with Corbyn sitting forever on the fence and now insisting that he could renegotiate a new Deal, cake and eat it with unicorns- all the rights but none of the responsibilities ... or help May do that.

The 48%, which are now demographically quite a bit more, and quite a bit more again as so many have changed their mind - find themselves without any political party that supports their view - in a vacuum. The Lib Dems and the Greens (Caroline Lucas being their only MP due to FPP system)- are the only ones in opposition, with the SNP in Scotland- but the political system does not give them an effective voice. British Politics does NOT lead to cooperation or cross party collaboration and solution finding- at all. The specifities of the British Political system are difficult to grasp from the outside, as it is so different, with NO proportional representation at all.

Anne Applebaum, of the Washington Post writes-

Brexit has been a catastrophic political failure. This messy, unpopular deal, the most unpopular government policy that anybody can remember, was produced by a political class that turned out to be ignorant — about Europe, Europeans, trade arrangements, institutions — and arrogant, disdaining knowledge and expertise. It was the work of leaders who favoured identity politics over economics, who preferred an undefined notion of “sovereignty” to the real institutions that gave Britain influence and power, who believed in fantasies and scorned reality.

I cannot see any current British politician who now has any credibility to take on the task of negotiating us through the chaos!

Out of the chaos of the Brexit debate in British Parliament has emerged a new international star - the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Berkow.

www.msnbc.com/all-in/watch/this-man-keeps-parliament-in-order-amidst-brexit-chaos-1428009027881

The 'first losers are the British people,' French president Emmanuel Macron said, speaking before Tuesday night's Brexit deal defeat. He went on to cast doubt over any chances the European Union would renegotiate Britain's exit deal: 'We already went as far as we could.' Speaking in Normandy not long before Britain's parliament voted 432-202 against the proposed divorce deal, the French leader said the British people had been manipulated into voting for something that didn't actually exist. He wished the country's representatives 'good luck' in figuring out a way to leave the EU on 29 March without a clear plan

www.theguardian.com/global/video/2019/jan/17/emmanuel-macrons-summation-of-brexit-the-british-people-were-sold-a-lie-video

Out of interest.

Is it the hatred/dislike of the DUP that some object to or is it the ' principal' behind the practice of ' Confidence and Supply' that posters object to?

If it is not the hatred/dislike of the DUP then how will those who keep expressing their view it is some sort of taudry affair feel if Labour won the next General Election but with no overall majority so Labour required to use the ' Confidence and Supply' of another party, possibly the SNP?

Surely if it is the ' principal' some object to then Labour would be eligible for criticism also. Or is it dependent on partisan politics and a view can alter to suit?

Some prefer Proportional Representation but does the thought of Coalition Government really suit? Proportional Representation would have possibly seen a sizeable UKIP representation or the like, would that really suit?

According to polling data from YouGov, 75% of 18- to 24-year-olds voted to remain in the European Union. On Friday, the UK voted to leave, with 52% of the overall vote.

How does it feel to be one of that 75%?

www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/24/meet-the-75-young-people-who-voted-to-remain-in-eu

Some short videos fro m our partner countries

www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/articles/49n2gBGlgPdfnYcxBjDcM9G/brexit-the-view-from-europe

I honestly think that few of the EU member states would be prepared to countenance a Federal Europe. Juncker may have a dream but he has to take them all with him to achieve it and I don't think he could do it.

He cant be that bad, he is addressing Junker from within the Flemish Parliament building.

Interesting that you should post a speech by the leader of Vlaams Belang, the far right Flemish Eurosceptic party, who makes Farage look like a Europhile social democrat.

Worth a view:
www.facebook.com/566279740491151/posts/589628054822986/

On the run up to the referendum Remain was supported by the leaders of all our political parties except UKIP, the BNP and the DUP.

Amongst foriegn politicians Remain was supported , not only by President Obama,but the leaders of all the other 27 EU countries, all our allies and the leaders of India, China, Brazil, all the Commonwealth countries etc.

The only foreign politicians who supported Leave were Vladimir Putin, Donald Trump and the French fascist Marine le Pen.

It seems that Leave voters who took the trouble to learn tbis were happy with the company they were keeping.

Finally Theresa May's deal gets a resounding endorsement- from none other than the man behind brexit, Vladimir Putin'.

I think this need a new thread, varian.

Remember the fuss about Obama's 'intervention'. I wonder what Leavers feel about being endorsed by Putin?

I'm with Mairi Black on this Westminster is an out of date mens club with pompous old bores and privileged privately educated mainly men behaving as if they were still at school.Time it was brought sharply into the 21st century .The behaviour of MP's is appalling and if it were children in the playground it wouldn't be allowed.So why DO we allow them to behave like this?

Finally Theresa May's deal gets a resounding endorsement- from none other than the man behind brexit, Vladimir Putin'. This champion of democracy absolutely agrees that it would be undemocratic to allow the British people to vote on the deal.

With friends like this,,,,

Most civilised democratic countries use some form of PR to elect their representatives.

There are many advantages - no-one need feel their vote is wasted because they live in a "safe seat", the number of representatives elected is in direct proportion to the number of votes for that party which seems fair, and yes, it does often result in coalition governments, which means that parties must co-operate, sometimes compromise and cannot act like an "elected dictatorship".

Think back to our coalition government of 2010-2015. It was so much better than the unfettered Tory government, elected by a minority under FPTP, that we have had since.

Davidh said PR would lead to " being held to ransom by small small parties with crazy demands."

Like the DUP holding the Conservatives in power for money rather than principles?

In the opinion of the Washington Post- "there’s no good way out of the Brexit disaster"-

At the heart of the chaos engulfing the United States’ closest ally is the contradiction between the vision sold to voters who supported leaving the European Union in a June 2016 referendum and the reality of the deal Ms. May came home with. Britons were told they could regain sovereignty from E.U. governance without suffering any economic consequences. In fact, any Brexit will leave the country poorer. That is true of the deal being offered by Ms. May. It is even more true of the “no-deal Brexit” that could occur next March 29 if Parliament does not act, causing massive disruption, including shortages of basic goods.

Yet even that is not the most dire prospect. Any deal that leaves Britain out of Europe’s single market could create a border between the two Irelands and threaten the peace accord that ended decades of violence in the North. Ms. May’s plan provides that if Britain and the European Union are unable to agree during a transition period on a relationship that avoids a hard border, Britain would remain in the E.U. customs union indefinitely. That would force London to continue observing E.U. regulations and prevent it from striking its own trade deals with other nations.

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/theres-no-good-way-out-of-the-brexit-disaster/2018/12/10/7606aace-fc9b-11e8-862a-b6a6f3ce8199_story.html?utm_term=.88e09d6a9cc0

A large percentage of the British population can’t stand foreigners and make it quite plain. It’s all over the media, the newspapers and sometimes the way you’re treated once you open your mouth.

What’s most astonishing is the double think, they’re proud of their multi-cultural society but yet they want to close the borders and keep people out. Their immigration system is locked up so tight it’s just not possible for Americans, Canadians or others from English-speaking countries to move there unless you’re wealthy or marry a Brit.

On the one hand, they’ll be welcoming to outsiders, on the other hand they ‘tut-tut’ at being overrun with foreigners. They have a special disdain for Eastern Europeans (except the ones that work hard). What’s most confusing is the distinction between ‘good foreigners’ (i.e. white ones) and ‘bad foreigners’ (i.e. brown ones). We’re all foreigners. Britain has been continually changed by foreign influences from people coming to live there. While there are recognizable problems with integration throughout Britain, overall being open to foreigners is a GOOD THING.

www.anglotopia.net/british-identity/humor/british-culture-9-things-i-still-dont-get-britain/

Believe it or not, this quotation is from a magazine for Anglophiles!

There is of course a culture of confrontation in British politics. The behaviour of some MPs in the H of C is abysmal. It's nothing to do with democracy simply of historical cultural behaviour. It's behaviour which is nutured in public schools and university debating chambers. There was a thread sometime ago about proposals to make debates less confontational in some universities by introducing 'jazz hands". It's behaviour which is characteristically male and may be one reason why there are still so few women who stay in politics.

lemongrove, no Sweden hasn't always had a coalition government but it is a fact that they are used to having one. Their whole political system is based on consesus and coalition building. This doesn't just apply to political life in Sweden. They value their 'samarbete' (=working together). The need to work together can be easily explained in a cold climate with few people. In the past people often lived far away from each other. It helped to stick together and work things out.
Of course, things have changed in Sweden as everywhere else but there is still this need for 'samarbete'.

My OP referred to one Swedish journalist's opinion that there is a culture of confrontation in British politics. Some of you agreed, others delivered tit for tat. My opinion is that the way our representatives are conducting themselves at the moment is a disgrace. The people deserve better.

Steve Bannon’s political operation to help rightwing populists triumph in next year’s European parliamentary elections is in disarray after he conceded that his campaign efforts could be illegal in most of the countries in which he planned to intervene.

The former chief strategist to Donald Trump has spent months trying to recruit European parties to his Brussels-based group, the Movement, which he promised would operate as kind of a political consultancy for like-minded parties campaigning in the bloc-wide vote in May 2019.

But the Guardian has established that Bannon would be barred or prevented from doing any meaningful work in nine of the 13 countries in which he is seeking to campaign, according to national electoral bodies and relevant ministries. Confronted with the findings, Bannon acknowledged he was taking legal advice on the matter.

www.theguardian.com/world/2018/nov/21/steve-bannons-rightwing-europe-operation-undermined-by-election-laws

Spain didn't do so well either, recently!
Didn't some of the Catalan politicians get arrested when they tried to hold a referendum?
I think they fled but faced charges including rebellion, sedition and misuse of public funds.
One Catalonian woman said:
"How I would like to be Scottish!", a reference to the 2014 independence referendum longingly admired by many Catalans.

Sweden:
Nationalist vote set to shatter Swedish calm
www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45269773

The far right has been gaining power in many countries in the EU - which is very disturbing.

People in glass houses etc.