Anarchy in the UK? When politicians ignore the electorate.

Loyalty to Political Party is ridiculous in this Brexit crisis. We need to rise above it and think of the Country.
Barclays is moving Billions to Ireland. Good on them.

Day6 (Who wants to bet Brussels caves in. Our billions to their economy is at stake.) Doesn't seem likely if you listen to BBC R4.

Gosh Day6 how do you know so much about what is going on in people's minds? Do you have ESP or have you bugged the House?

Yvette Cooper's amendment (drafted by Cooper) which would extend article 50 to the end of 2019 was defeated in the Commons last night.

Here is a clear example of one Labour MP who defied her constituents and let self interest dictate her actions as an MP. She wanted as a Remainer, (representing a constituency of 70% Leave voters,) to change the terms, to delay Brexit for yet another chance for a second referendum or the now failed Chukka Umunna's People's Vote campaign to take off.

Neither has happened and it now looks like the Remain challenge is dead in the water. All Remainer hijacking attempts have failed, Cooper failed and the Brady amendment was passed.

WTO is our default position, in law, should we not strike a favourable deal with the EU regarding the Irish border dispute. (Who wants to bet Brussels caves in. Our billions to their economy is at stake.)

For the first time in a long time it looks like we can go forward with Brexit and be sure of leaving the EU on March 29th.

Remainers have done all in their power to stop the democratic vote being acted upon and most Labour MPs have hoped a failed Brexit would mean a General Election was on the cards. Self interest and a desire to create obstacles for the government in trying to get Brexit withdrawal sorted out has left many Remain MPs (from all parties) with egg on their faces and hopefully on a list which will be of interest to their Leave constituents.

To their credit there is a list of Labour MPs who voted against Cooper's delaying tactics and to their shame the Tory MPs who crossed the floor to vote with Labour and Cooper and wrest power from their own leader and PM are also known. Where is their loyalty, to the party, the people and the UK?

Come the next general election I hope people know who they are voting for, and what their candidate stands for.

Remainer MPs have cheered on the EU throughout the negotiations, looking for the UK to fail. It is truly shameful.

Look at how few Remainer publications are reporting the egg on face defeats. The Guardian and the BBC (Brussels Broadcasting Corporation) are strangely quiet.

The feeling in the country is that we just have to get on with it, and now perhaps we can. The delaying tactics have been outed and dealt with. May can go to Brussels with the backing of parliament to sort out the backstop condition, or there is no deal.

There will be a lot of Remainer MPs seeking solace in their subsidised-by-the-taxpayer bars this week I suspect.

I bet a lot of the traitorous MPs will be creating a charm offensive now with their constituents. Schmoozing the people because they have been outed as siding with Brussels won't wash.

At least "Anarchy in the UK" can be shelved for now but it isn't over yet.

It's amazing how the media is reporting very little of this significant Brexit victory, isn't it?

Yes David on the World at One there was a Dutch man explaining how easy it all was but then the Brit pointed out, as you have done, that it was all fine and dandy with legal goods but not illegal ones. He also said there are 21 border crossings from the south to the north!

There isn’t a problem carrying out electronic customs checks between countries that are either EU or EFTA members because there are agreed rules. The UK does not want to be part of that it wants a different arrangement, the backstop is there in case rules cannot be agreed (they won’t be ).
In theory electronic checks could be carried out legitimate documented goods, but as soon as there is a tariff difference there will be illegal smuggling. We see it now with cigarettes and wine, personal use is OK but more than that is tax evasion and punishable.
Nobody wants to police the border in Ireland

Day6: ^It does make you wonder what games the EU is playing: Barnier.....23rd January 2019: “We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border.

Teresa May in June 2016:
/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-latest-theresa-may-northern-ireland-customs-union-a8234766.html

It does make you wonder what games our PM is playing:

I have been reading about electronic border controls in relation to the Irish border, and that it is not as simple as it appears. The system that the government was considering I believe is "max pac" which was previously rejected because of the huge annual implementation costs and fact that it is unsuitable for the Irish situation. There is some information on "The Conversation" about this and there have also been various newspapers articles.

Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay admits on BBC Today that the Government has no ‘alternative arrangents’ for no border between Ireland and Northern Ireland: Welcome to yesterday and the day before that and before that and

It appears that the border dispute was a red herring all along, given Barnier revealed last week that should there be no deal there would be no hard border and it would be simple enough to employ electronic customs checks, as happens throughout Europe.

Barnier.....23rd January 2019. “We will have to find an operational way of carrying out checks and controls without putting back in place a border"

It does make you wonder what games the EU is playing.

The politicians have ignored the sane majority of the electorate for too long.

And another one.

Varian

' her nasty little group of brexitextremists at the expense of everyone else"

" the gutter press to stir up the violent thugs amongst their readers. "

Why do you insist you are above name calling yet continue to do so, albeit the above is milder than of some of your comments.

Debate not hate you do your cause no good.

Maizie d

"Still prepared to take a chance, POGS. I don't think that £10 billion bribes are a usual feature of a coalition agreement."
----

Disinformation Mazie D it was not a 10 billion bribe it was 1 billion and you don't mention the bribe from Labour/ Gordon Brown when Labour wanted the DUP to back Labour as previously mentioned.

Hung Parliaments require back room shenanigans to obtain power that is why Proportional Representation will create more not less accusations of bribery, you have to offer something to get even a ' Confidence and Supply ' government through.
-----

"One of the most consistent analyses/theories of the exceptional turnout for the 2018 referendum is that voters felt that their vote counted. "

What 2018 referendum, do you mean the 2016 referendum ?
If so then yes any voter would expect their vote to count but that has proven to be a folly and the damage done to democracy and our parliamentarians reputation in particular is one that cannot be denied , only by those who refuse to accept the result of a democratic vote taken in 2016
-----

"And, while we're at it, I think that all bona fide political parties should be publicly funded, taking no 'donations' from anyone, and that MPs should be banned from working for anything apart from publicly funded institutions while they are an MP."
--

Some of the biggest donors to Labour are the Unions . Do you propose the Unions should not fund Labour to be fair to all the other parties? If not , why not?

Re your point :-

" MPs should be banned from working for anything apart from publicly funded institutions while they are an MP."

How will that work for Labour / Coperative MP's who work on behalf of coperative societies? Like Union funding hould funding cease from the cooperative society.?

How does that work for Labour MP's who take funding from the Unions, Should the Unions cease funding Labour MP's.

It is said the biggest ' lobbying group ' in Parliament are the Trade Unions.

John Simpson Tweeted:

When I was the BBC political editor, in the early 1980s, I was shocked by the ignorance of most MPs about the way the outside world worked. Judging from today's proceedings in Parliament, things don't seem to have changed much.

Jon Snow:

Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay admits on BBC Today that the Government has no ‘alternative arrangents’ for no border between Ireland and Northern Ireland: Welcome to yesterday and the day before that and before that and.....

Theresa May has yet again pandered to her nasty little group of brexitextremists at the expense of everyone else. She has promised to try to achieve something which she told us was impossible. The more she gives into these people the more extreme their demands become. When she is told by the EU that they are not willing to renegotiate, the rhetoric will be "it's all their fault - the EU is being nasty to us" and this will be repeated by the gutter press to stir up the violent thugs amongst their readers.

The politicians have ignored the sane majority of the electorate for far too long. The latest average of the six most recent polls shows REMAIN 8% ahead of leave. The electorate do not want any kind of brexit.

whatukthinks.org/eu/opinion-polls/euref2-poll-of-polls/#

www.facebook.com/BrexitWrecksIt/?rc=p

List of Job Losses in the UK which can be attributed to the brexit vote.

Job losses are attributed to Brexit if they meet one or more of the following conditions:

1. The employer's business has been significantly affected by sterling's devaluation, either immediately through rises in the cost of imported inputs or later by inflation passed on by those who were so affected.

2. Government austerity cuts are attributed to Brexit since Britain voted to remain the EU, austerity would have been lifted instead of deepened.

3. Barring other obvious explanations businesses that were doing okay but experienced a significant slowdown after the Brexit vote are deemed to have been impacted by Brexit.

4. Businesses and other enterprises (e.g. EU regulatory authorities) that will be impacted by the imposition of trading or regulatory barriers (including the potential imposition of tariffs).

5. All jobs moved abroad are considered Brexit-related even if offshored outside the EU, since Brexit makes Britain a "third country" to the EU, just like India or China.

Other factors are occasionally cited but these are the main categories.

Job losses due to changes in the way business is conducted, such as those due to banking automation or to internet shopping, are usually excluded unless there is some compelling reason to regard Brexit is the real reason for cutting staff.

docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/e/2PACX-1vTIPx0lI6pb-3Tn-3D6uNJNyKcCd-A8uPMxViagyJAR9T87ZmnSdAEPCzp5ljlNYoUNdxJiJqQdBm7b/pubhtml?fbclid=IwAR3fhKmdO_4xGNPf6DoPkwtSIevUrQacAB5SK5MCGkxNBU4Zdi465U8xX1k

Still prepared to take a chance, POGS. I don't think that £10 billion bribes are a usual feature of a coalition agreement.

One of the most consistent analyses/theories of the exceptional turnout for the 2018 referendum is that voters felt that their vote counted. I have voted in every General Election for some 45= years now, in different parts of England, and only once in all that time has my vote been part of the winning candidate's majority. And it cost me some pangs to do it. I'm not at all surprised that public apathy is rife when people feel that their vote counts for very little or nothing at all.

And, while we're at it, I think that all bona fide political parties should be publicly funded, taking no 'donations' from anyone, and that MPs should be banned from working for anything apart from publicly funded institutions while they are an MP.

Varian Maizie d

Your posts are confusing.

That is what is happening now and could well happen at subsequent General Elections but you have made it perfectly clear over various threads you think Coalition Government / Confidence and Supply, ( parties working together ) , when the political parties are not of your liking you don't like it.

It is either a ' principal ' that applies whether it be for example Tories/DUP or Labour / DUP or any other combination . We could get a shock in the future what new political parties are formed, who knows?

It appears to me some only accept the ' principal ' as long as it chimes with their political view.

The trouble is that those of us in "safe seats" have very little chance of being heard. This putrid FPTP voting system leaves most folk represented by a party they voted against.

As First Past The Post has landed up with the dreadful mess we are now in, with half of the electorate who voted being completely marginalised and ignored, I think I'm perfectly happy to take my chances with a more consensual form of government.

We may end up with some parties we don't much like but at least their more despicable or lunatic policies are likely to be modified by having to reach agreement with other parties in government.

It might also encourage voters to put some thought into their choices instead of blindly voting for the same old, same old. And, they could feel that their 'voice' has more of a chance to be heard.

If we had PR then you would be right POGS - coalition governments would be much more likely. Parties would have to work together to find common ground and they would be able to govern in the name of the majority of the electorate. The UK has been very badly served by FPTP which so often results of a dictarship by a minority.

Varian

I repeat it is either the ' principal' or hypocritical backing only those political parties we as individuals like when it comes to liking or disliking Coalition Governments/ Confidence and Supply Agreements.

Just to remind posters who may have forgot.

In the 2010 General Election Labour under Gordon Brown tried to get the DUP to back them by committing to ' Ring Fence' the Northern Ireland budget from spending cuts. Some viewed that as a form of bribary.

Another case of Labour and the DUP in 2008

www.theguardian.com/politics/2008/dec/31/42-days

"Gordon Brown's government did reward the Democratic Unionists for backing the 42-day detention of terror suspects, Northern Ireland's first minister claimed today .

In his new year message, DUP leader Peter Robinson said his party's decision to support the 42-days bill helped deliver major economic investment for the province "
---

It is clear to me some do not hold the ' principal ' behind the usual./customary use of Coalition Governments/ Confidence and Supply but hypocritical happy with the arrangements as long is it between political parties that chime with them.

It is either acceptable for ALL/ANY political parties to go into Coalition/Confidence and Supply Agreements or not at all.!!!

Proportional Representation will bring forth probably more Coalition / Confidence and Supply Governments and it is no point thinking otherwise and certainly voters will have to get used to having Coalitions they absolutely would not want.

There was a significant difference between the Tory/LibDem coalition and the present arrangement the Tories have with the DUP. That government did represent a majority of the voters in the 2010 GE. So it had some democratic legitimacy.

No money was involved as a bribe and, more importantly, we can all now surely see that the coalition govt, for all its faults, was nowhere near as bad as the subsequent Tory majority govt, let alone the present arrangement of pandering to extremists who do not even represent most folk in NI.

The LibDems in govt were able to block some bad Tory policies and enact some good LibDem policies, some of which, like the pupil premium, the Tories now claim credit for.

Proportional Representation leads to the continued ''possibility' of Coalitions/Confidence and Supply governments. When the Tories and Lib Dems went into Coalition and the Tories had a Confidence and Supply agreement with the DUP there is/was an outcry of foul play, often by those commentators who advocate Proportional Representation.

If the next General Election provides no overall majority and Labour and SNP formed a Coalition Government or forged a Confidence and Supply Agreement would that be OK ?

Is it the principal or whether individuals ' like' who the parties are that we base our views on Coalition Governments/ Confidence and Supply Agreements. If it is the case of acceptance because an individual favours the politics of the parties involved then that is hypocrisy if they dislike it when the parties do not suit their politics.

Proportional Representation could easily put political parties unknown to us at present to win seats and again if you hold fast to the 'principal ' of Proportional Representation you might just have to accept political parties that you dislike even more than you do at present.

The bitterness of the referendum spills over in these pages mainl because of closed minds. We have the same in the cabinet and in Parliament. I cannot claim to know what the electorate desires unlike many. Which is why I am prepared to accept the decision of the whole electorate based on a Governments detailed proposal or remain.

I agree Mamie & David Macron is trying to bring about much needed changes but most people seem to want the status quo to remain. It really can't if France wants to grow and prosper.