My thoughts after Labour Conference came to end

Parliamentarians returned to parliament after the recess period only for party conference to take place from all the political parties to determine policies from party members which social policies they want to vote on or reject in the hope it will appear in the next Local Government and National manifestos or take a position on which will help influence our voters with their choice of political party which represents their views for the local government elections in 2018 and 2020 general elections. Don’t forget that all manifestos comes out nearer the time when the general, local elections are called by the government.
There were some good speakers and some of the speakers that stuck my mind is no doubt one of the speaker who spoke on homelessness and the affects it has on them, she highlighted some of the root causes and what she witnessed and the other speaker spoke of disabilities on how it affects the daily routine and urge conference to support disability awareness both speakers hit a raw nerve to delegates both of them were in my opinion were speaking about their experience and first time delegates.
No doubt there will be delegates and visitors that will be charge from #Lab17 and will be motivated to get the vote out for Labour. Campaigning is all year round and not just during election times as seasoned party members will inform us all, which true campaigning is all year round and not just during election times. Labour members will have to redouble their efforts to turn all the wards around from Blue,(Conservative) Yellow,(Fibdems oh I mean Libdems) and purple and yellow(UKIP) all to Red( Labour) across the nation I kid you not. Now is the time to do your bit for our party by getting active as soon as possible by knocking on every door leaving no stones unturned.
Just some of the highlights of Labour Conference which made my day and I include the YouTube which made progress and gained momentum during the course of conference which made it even more exciting starting with Jeremy Corbyn, John McDonnell and followed by Tom Watson.

Jeremy Corbyn Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:

 

John McDonnell Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:

 

Tom Watson Conference Speech 2017 via youtube:

They all have a message to all voters of all classes of race and creed, and no matter what your background labour is showing the way why you should vote Labour in all the elections all year round. To those who still have doubts in Labour I will be the first to acknowledge that Labour did not win the general elections 2017 and Labour activists have a lot of hard work to convince voters why labour is the party in waiting to be the next government. I’m sure the press will be siding with the conservatives by stating that Labour is going back to the 1970s -1980s they seem to be remembering the Kinnock years when he was over confident which cost him the general elections. Somehow they seem to overlook the eighteen years of underfunding of public services, attacks on cold miners, the riots that took place across the UK, and deaths in police custody just to name a few. I urge voters to remember that it was the Labour Party that cut the majority of the conservatives and in return they had to depend on the Democratic Union Party(DUP) for a confidence and supply agreement vote which it is placed on public record. Look at the conservatives record on u-turns they have made when they were in office only for some of Labour policies to be adopted by the government, heck they were willing to drop their own manifesto just implement our policies such as lifting the one percent pay cap, rent cap, living wage, energy cap etc.

It looks like Labour has done it again by having #Maybot on the hop during her visit Florence by reminding her that she either buckle up or move aside for a Labour government in waiting and this was her life saving response:

It’s good to be here in this great city of Florence today at a critical time in the evolution of the relationship between the United Kingdom and the European Union.

It was here, more than anywhere else, that the Renaissance began – a period of history that inspired centuries of creativity and critical thought across our continent and which in many ways defined what it meant to be European.

A period of history whose example shaped the modern world. A period of history that teaches us that when we come together in a spirit of ambition and innovation, we have it within ourselves to do great things.

That shows us that if we open our minds to new thinking and new possibilities, we can forge a better, brighter future for all our peoples.

And that is what I want to focus on today. For we are moving through a new and critical period in the history of the United Kingdom’s relationship with the European Union.

The British people have decided to leave the EU; and to be a global, free-trading nation, able to chart our own way in the world.

For many, this is an exciting time, full of promise; for others it is a worrying one.

I look ahead with optimism, believing that if we use this moment to change not just our relationship with Europe, but also the way we do things at home, this will be a defining moment in the history of our nation.

And it is an exciting time for many in Europe too. The European Union is beginning a new chapter in the story of its development. Just last week, President Juncker set out his ambitions for the future of the European Union.

There is a vibrant debate going on about the shape of the EU’s institutions and the direction of the Union in the years ahead. We don’t want to stand in the way of that.

Indeed, we want to be your strongest friend and partner as the EU, and the UK thrive side by side.

Shared challenges

And that partnership is important. For as we look ahead, we see shared challenges and opportunities in common.

Here in Italy today, our two countries are working together to tackle some of the greatest challenges of our time; challenges where all too often geography has put Italy on the frontline.

As I speak, Britain’s Royal Navy, National Crime Agency and Border Force are working alongside their Italian partners to save lives in the Mediterranean and crack down on the evil traffickers who are exploiting desperate men, women and children who seek a better life.

Our two countries are also working together in the fight against terrorism – from our positions at the forefront of the international coalition against Daesh to our work to disrupt the networks terrorist groups use to finance their operations and recruit to their ranks.

And earlier this week, I was delighted that Prime Minister Gentiloni was able to join President Macron and myself in convening the first ever UN summit of government and industry to move further and faster in preventing terrorist use of the Internet.

Mass migration and terrorism are but two examples of the challenges to our shared European interests and values that we can only solve in partnership.

The weakening growth of global trade; the loss of popular support for the forces of liberalism and free trade that is driving moves towards protectionism; the threat of climate change depleting and degrading the planet we leave for future generations; and most recently, the outrageous proliferation of nuclear weapons by North Korea with a threat to use them.

Here on our own continent, we see territorial aggression to the east; and from the South threats from instability and civil war; terrorism, crime and other challenges which respect no borders.

The only way for us to respond to this vast array of challenges is for likeminded nations and peoples to come together and defend the international order that we have worked so hard to create – and the values of liberty, democracy, human rights and the rule of law by which we stand.

Britain has always – and will always – stand with its friends and allies in defence of these values.

Our decision to leave the European Union is in no way a repudiation of this longstanding commitment. We may be leaving the European Union, but we are not leaving Europe.

Our resolve to draw on the full weight of our military, intelligence, diplomatic and development resources to lead international action, with our partners, on the issues that affect the security and prosperity of our peoples is unchanged.

Our commitment to the defence – and indeed the advance – of our shared values is undimmed.

Our determination to defend the stability, security and prosperity of our European neighbours and friends remains steadfast.

The decision of the British people

And we will do all this as a sovereign nation in which the British people are in control.

Their decision to leave the institution of the European Union was an expression of that desire – a statement about how they want their democracy to work.

They want more direct control of decisions that affect their daily lives; and that means those decisions being made in Britain by people directly accountable to them.

The strength of feeling that the British people have about this need for control and the direct accountability of their politicians is one reason why, throughout its membership, the United Kingdom has never totally felt at home being in the European Union.

And perhaps because of our history and geography, the European Union never felt to us like an integral part of our national story in the way it does to so many elsewhere in Europe.

It is a matter of choices. The profound pooling of sovereignty that is a crucial feature of the European Union permits unprecedentedly deep cooperation, which brings benefits.

But it also means that when countries are in the minority they must sometimes accept decisions they do not want, even affecting domestic matters with no market implications beyond their borders. And when such decisions are taken, they can be very hard to change.

So the British electorate made a choice. They chose the power of domestic democratic control over pooling that control, strengthening the role of the UK Parliament and the devolved Scottish Parliament, Welsh and Northern Ireland Assemblies in deciding our laws.

That is our choice. It does not mean we are no longer a proud member of the family of European nations. And it does not mean we are turning our back on Europe; or worse that we do not wish the EU to succeed. The success of the EU is profoundly in our national interest and that of the wider world.

But having made this choice, the question now is whether we – the leaders of Britain, and of the EU’s Member States and institutions – can demonstrate that creativity, that innovation, that ambition that we need to shape a new partnership to the benefit of all our people.

I believe we must. And I believe we can.

For while the UK’s departure from the EU is inevitably a difficult process, it is in all of our interests for our negotiations to succeed. If we were to fail, or be divided, the only beneficiaries would be those who reject our values and oppose our interests.

So I believe we share a profound sense of responsibility to make this change work smoothly and sensibly, not just for people today but for the next generation who will inherit the world we leave them.

The eyes of the world are on us, but if we can be imaginative and creative about the way we establish this new relationship, if we can proceed on the basis of trust in each other, I believe we can be optimistic about the future we can build for the United Kingdom and for the European Union.

Negotiations

In my speech at Lancaster House earlier this year, I set out the UK’s negotiating objectives.

Those still stand today. Since that speech and the triggering of Article 50 in March, the UK has published 14 papers to address the current issues in the talks and set out the building blocks of the relationship we would like to see with the EU, both as we leave, and into the future.

We have now conducted three rounds of negotiations. And while, at times, these negotiations have been tough, it is clear that, thanks to the professionalism and diligence of David Davis and Michel Barnier, we have made concrete progress on many important issues.

For example, we have recognised from the outset there are unique issues to consider when it comes to Northern Ireland.

The UK government, the Irish government and the EU as a whole have been clear that through the process of our withdrawal we will protect progress made in Northern Ireland over recent years – and the lives and livelihoods that depend on this progress.

As part of this, we and the EU have committed to protecting the Belfast Agreement and the Common Travel Area and, looking ahead, we have both stated explicitly that we will not accept any physical infrastructure at the border.

We owe it to the people of Northern Ireland – and indeed to everyone on the island of Ireland – to see through these commitments.

We have also made significant progress on how we look after European nationals living in the UK and British nationals living in the 27 Member States of the EU.

I know this whole process has been a cause of great worry and anxiety for them and their loved ones.

But I want to repeat to the 600,000 Italians in the UK – and indeed to all EU citizens who have made their lives in our country – that we want you to stay; we value you; and we thank you for your contribution to our national life – and it has been, and remains, one of my first goals in this negotiation to ensure that you can carry on living your lives as before.

I am clear that the guarantee I am giving on your rights is real. And I doubt anyone with real experience of the UK would doubt the independence of our courts or of the rigour with which they will uphold people’s legal rights.

But I know there are concerns that over time the rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens overseas will diverge. I want to incorporate our agreement fully into UK law and make sure the UK courts can refer directly to it.

Where there is uncertainty around underlying EU law, I want the UK courts to be able to take into account the judgments of the European Court of Justice with a view to ensuring consistent interpretation. On this basis, I hope our teams can reach firm agreement quickly.

Shared future

At the moment, the negotiations are focused on the arrangements for the UK’s withdrawal from the EU. But we need to move on to talk about our future relationship.

Of course, we recognise that we can’t leave the EU and have everything stay the same. Life for us will be different.

But what we do want – and what we hope that you, our European friends, want too – is to stay as partners who carry on working together for our mutual benefit.

In short, we want to work hand in hand with the European Union, rather than as part of the European Union.

That is why in my speech at Lancaster House I said that the United Kingdom would seek to secure a new, deep and special partnership with the European Union.

And this should span both a new economic relationship and a new relationship on security.

So let me set out what each of these relationships could look like – before turning to the question of how we get there.

Economic partnership

Let me start with the economic partnership.

The United Kingdom is leaving the European Union. We will no longer be members of its single market or its customs union. For we understand that the single market’s four freedoms are indivisible for our European friends.

We recognise that the single market is built on a balance of rights and obligations. And we do not pretend that you can have all the benefits of membership of the single market without its obligations.

So our task is to find a new framework that allows for a close economic partnership but holds those rights and obligations in a new and different balance.

But as we work out together how to do so, we do not start with a blank sheet of paper, like other external partners negotiating a free trade deal from scratch have done.

In fact, we start from an unprecedented position. For we have the same rules and regulations as the EU – and our EU Withdrawal Bill will ensure they are carried over into our domestic law at the moment we leave the EU.

So the question for us now in building a new economic partnership is not how we bring our rules and regulations closer together, but what we do when one of us wants to make changes.

One way of approaching this question is to put forward a stark and unimaginative choice between two models: either something based on European Economic Area membership; or a traditional Free Trade Agreement, such as that the EU has recently negotiated with Canada.

I don’t believe either of these options would be best for the UK or best for the European Union.

European Economic Area membership would mean the UK having to adopt at home – automatically and in their entirety – new EU rules. Rules over which, in future, we will have little influence and no vote.

Such a loss of democratic control could not work for the British people. I fear it would inevitably lead to friction and then a damaging re-opening of the nature of our relationship in the near future: the very last thing that anyone on either side of the Channel wants.

As for a Canadian style free trade agreement, we should recognise that this is the most advanced free trade agreement the EU has yet concluded and a breakthrough in trade between Canada and the EU.

But compared with what exists between Britain and the EU today, it would nevertheless represent such a restriction on our mutual market access that it would benefit neither of our economies.

Not only that, it would start from the false premise that there is no pre-existing regulatory relationship between us. And precedent suggests that it could take years to negotiate.

We can do so much better than this.

As I said at Lancaster House, let us not seek merely to adopt a model already enjoyed by other countries. Instead let us be creative as well as practical in designing an ambitious economic partnership which respects the freedoms and principles of the EU, and the wishes of the British people.

I believe there are good reasons for this level of optimism and ambition.

First of all, the UK is the EU’s largest trading partner, one of the largest economies in the world, and a market of considerable importance for many businesses and jobs across the continent. And the EU is our largest trading partner, so it is in all our interests to find a creative solution.

The European Union has shown in the past that creative arrangements can be agreed in other areas. For example, it has developed a diverse array of arrangements with neighbouring countries outside the EU, both in economic relations and in justice and home affairs.

Furthermore, we share the same set of fundamental beliefs; a belief in free trade, rigorous and fair competition, strong consumer rights, and that trying to beat other countries’ industries by unfairly subsidising one’s own is a serious mistake.

So there is no need to impose tariffs where we have none now, and I don’t think anyone sensible is contemplating this.

And as we have set out in a future partnership paper, when it comes to trade in goods, we will do everything we can to avoid friction at the border. But of course the regulatory issues are crucial.

We share a commitment to high regulatory standards.

People in Britain do not want shoddy goods, shoddy services, a poor environment or exploitative working practices and I can never imagine them thinking those things to be acceptable.

The government I lead is committed not only to protecting high standards, but strengthening them.

So I am optimistic about what we can achieve by finding a creative solution to a new economic relationship that can support prosperity for all our peoples.

Now in any trading relationship, both sides have to agree on a set of rules which govern how each side behaves.

So we will need to discuss with our European partners new ways of managing our interdependence and our differences, in the context of our shared values.

There will be areas of policy and regulation which are outside the scope of our trade and economic relations where this should be straightforward.

There will be areas which do affect our economic relations where we and our European friends may have different goals; or where we share the same goals but want to achieve them through different means.

And there will be areas where we want to achieve the same goals in the same ways, because it makes sense for our economies.

And because rights and obligations must be held in balance, the decisions we both take will have consequences for the UK’s access to European markets and vice versa.

To make this partnership work, because disagreements inevitably arise, we will need a strong and appropriate dispute resolution mechanism.

It is, of course, vital that any agreement reached – its specific terms and the principles on which it is based – are interpreted in the same way by the European Union and the United Kingdom and we want to discuss how we do that.

This could not mean the European Court of Justice – or indeed UK courts – being the arbiter of disputes about the implementation of the agreement between the UK and the EU however.

It wouldn’t be right for one party’s court to have jurisdiction over the other. But I am confident we can find an appropriate mechanism for resolving disputes.

So this new economic partnership, would be comprehensive and ambitious. It would be underpinned by high standards, and a practical approach to regulation that enables us to continue to work together in bringing shared prosperity to our peoples for generations to come.

Security relationship

Let me turn to the new security relationship that we want to see.

To keep our people safe and to secure our values and interests, I believe it is essential that, although the UK is leaving the EU, the quality of our cooperation on security is maintained.

We believe we should be as open-minded as possible about how we continue to work together on what can be life and death matters.

Our security co-operation is not just vital because our people face the same threats, but also because we share a deep, historic belief in the same values – the values of peace, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

Of course, there is no pre-existing model for co-operation between the EU and external partners which replicates the full scale and depth of the collaboration that currently exists between the EU and the UK on security, law enforcement and criminal justice.

But as the threats we face evolve faster than ever, I believe it is vital that we work together to design new, dynamic arrangements that go beyond the existing arrangements that the EU has in this area – and draw on the legal models the EU has previously used to structure co-operation with external partners in other fields such as trade.

So we are proposing a bold new strategic agreement that provides a comprehensive framework for future security, law enforcement and criminal justice co-operation: a treaty between the UK and the EU.

This would complement the extensive and mature bi-lateral relationships that we already have with European friends to promote our common security.

Our ambition would be to build a model that is underpinned by our shared principles, including high standards of data protection and human rights.

It would be kept sufficiently versatile and dynamic to respond to the ever-evolving threats that we face. And it would create an ongoing dialogue in which law enforcement and criminal justice priorities can be shared and – where appropriate – tackled jointly.

We are also proposing a far reaching partnership on how we protect Europe together from the threats we face in the world today; how we work together to promote our shared values and interests abroad; whether security, spreading the rule of law, dealing with emerging threats, handling the migration crisis or helping countries out of poverty.

The United Kingdom has outstanding capabilities. We have the biggest defence budget in Europe, and one of the largest development budgets in the world. We have a far-reaching diplomatic network, and world class security, intelligence and law enforcement services.

So what we are offering will be unprecedented in its breadth, taking in cooperation on diplomacy, defence and security, and development.

And it will be unprecedented in its depth, in terms of the degree of engagement that we would aim to deliver.

It is our ambition to work as closely as possible together with the EU, protecting our people, promoting our values and ensuring the future security of our continent.

The United Kingdom is unconditionally committed to maintaining Europe’s security. And the UK will continue to offer aid and assistance to EU member states that are the victims of armed aggression, terrorism and natural or manmade disasters.

Taken as a whole, this bold new security partnership will not only reflect our history and the practical benefits of co-operation in tackling shared threats, but also demonstrate the UK’s genuine commitment to promoting our shared values across the world and to maintaining a secure and prosperous Europe.

Implementation

That is the partnership I want Britain and the European Union to have in the future.

None of its goals should be controversial. Everything I have said is about creating a long-term relationship through which the nations of the European Union and the United Kingdom can work together for the mutual benefit of all our people.

If we adopt this vision of a deep and special partnership, the question is then how we get there: how we build a bridge from where we are now to where we want to be.

The United Kingdom will cease to be a member of the European Union on 29th March 2019.

We will no longer sit at the European Council table or in the Council of Ministers, and we will no longer have Members of the European Parliament.

Our relations with countries outside the EU can be developed in new ways, including through our own trade negotiations, because we will no longer be an EU country, and we will no longer directly benefit from the EU’s future trade negotiations.

But the fact is that, at that point, neither the UK – nor the EU and its Members States – will be in a position to implement smoothly many of the detailed arrangements that will underpin this new relationship we seek.

Neither is the European Union legally able to conclude an agreement with the UK as an external partner while it is itself still part of the European Union.

And such an agreement on the future partnership will require the appropriate legal ratification, which would take time.

It is also the case that people and businesses – both in the UK and in the EU – would benefit from a period to adjust to the new arrangements in a smooth and orderly way.

As I said in my speech at Lancaster House a period of implementation would be in our mutual interest. That is why I am proposing that there should be such a period after the UK leaves the EU.

Clearly people, businesses and public services should only have to plan for one set of changes in the relationship between the UK and the EU.

So during the implementation period access to one another’s markets should continue on current terms and Britain also should continue to take part in existing security measures. And I know businesses, in particular, would welcome the certainty this would provide.

The framework for this strictly time-limited period, which can be agreed under Article 50, would be the existing structure of EU rules and regulations.

How long the period is should be determined simply by how long it will take to prepare and implement the new processes and new systems that will underpin that future partnership.

For example, it will take time to put in place the new immigration system required to re-take control of the UK’s borders.

So during the implementation period, people will continue to be able to come and live and work in the UK; but there will be a registration system – an essential preparation for the new regime.

As of today, these considerations point to an implementation period of around two years.

But because I don’t believe that either the EU or the British people will want the UK to stay longer in the existing structures than is necessary, we could also agree to bring forward aspects of that future framework such as new dispute resolution mechanisms more quickly if this can be done smoothly.

It is clear that what would be most helpful to people and businesses on both sides, who want this process to be smooth and orderly, is for us to agree the detailed arrangements for this implementation period as early as possible. Although we recognise that the EU institutions will need to adopt a formal position.

And at the heart of these arrangements, there should be a clear double lock: a guarantee that there will be a period of implementation giving businesses and people alike the certainty that they will be able to prepare for the change; and a guarantee that this implementation period will be time-limited, giving everyone the certainty that this will not go on for ever.

These arrangements will create valuable certainty.

But in this context I am conscious that our departure causes another type of uncertainty for the remaining member states and their taxpayers over the EU budget.

Some of the claims made on this issue are exaggerated and unhelpful and we can only resolve this as part of the settlement of all the issues I have been talking about today.

Still I do not want our partners to fear that they will need to pay more or receive less over the remainder of the current budget plan as a result of our decision to leave. The UK will honour commitments we have made during the period of our membership.

And as we move forwards, we will also want to continue working together in ways that promote the long-term economic development of our continent.

This includes continuing to take part in those specific policies and programmes which are greatly to the UK and the EU’s joint advantage, such as those that promote science, education and culture – and those that promote our mutual security.

And as I set out in my speech at Lancaster House, in doing so, we would want to make an ongoing contribution to cover our fair share of the costs involved.

Conclusion

When I gave my speech at the beginning of this year I spoke not just about the preparations we were making for a successful negotiation but also about our preparations for our life outside the European Union – with or without what I hope will be a successful deal.

And the necessary work continues on all these fronts so that we are able to meet any eventual outcome.

But as we meet here today, in this city of creativity and rebirth, let us open our minds to the possible.

To a new era of cooperation and partnership between the United Kingdom and the European Union. And to a stronger, fairer, more prosperous future for us all.

For that is the prize if we get this negotiation right.

A sovereign United Kingdom and a confident European Union, both free to chart their own course.

A new partnership of values and interests.

A new alliance that can stand strongly together in the world.

That is the goal towards which we must work in the months ahead as the relationship between Britain and Europe evolves.

However it does so, I am clear that Britain’s future is bright.

Our fundamentals are strong: a legal system respected around the world; a keen openness to foreign investment; an enthusiasm for innovation; an ease of doing business; some of the best universities and researchers you can find anywhere; an exceptional national talent for creativity and an indomitable spirit.

It is our fundamental strengths that really determine a country’s success and that is why Britain’s economy will always be strong.

There are other reasons why our future should give us confidence. We will always be a champion of economic openness; we will always be a country whose pitch to the world is high standards at home.

When we differ from the EU in our regulatory choices, it won’t be to try and attain an unfair competitive advantage, it will be because we want rules that are right for Britain’s particular situation.

The best way for us both to succeed is to fulfil the potential of the partnership I have set out today.

For we should be in no doubt, that if our collective endeavours in these negotiations were to prove insufficient to reach an agreement, it would be a failure in the eyes of history and a damaging blow to the future of our continent.

Indeed, I believe the difference between where we would all be if we fail – and where we could be if we can achieve the kind of new partnership I have set out today – to be so great that it is beholden on all of us involved to demonstrate the leadership and flexibility needed to ensure that we succeed.

Yes, the negotiations to get there will be difficult. But if we approach them in the right way – respectful of the challenges for both sides and pragmatic about resolving them – we can find a way forward that makes a success of this for all of our peoples.

I recognise that this is not something that you – our European partners – wanted to do. It is a distraction from what you want to get on with. But we have to get this right.

And we both want to get this done as swiftly as possible.

So it is up to leaders to set the tone.

And the tone I want to set is one of partnership and friendship.

A tone of trust, the cornerstone of any relationship.

For if we get the spirit of this negotiation right; if we get the spirit of this partnership right, then at the end of this process we will find that we are able to resolve the issues where we disagree respectfully and quickly.

And if we can do that, then when this chapter of our European history is written, it will be remembered not for the differences we faced but for the vision we showed; not for the challenges we endured but for the creativity we used to overcome them; not for a relationship that ended but a new partnership that began.

A partnership of interests, a partnership of values; a partnership of ambition for a shared future: the UK and the EU side by side delivering prosperity and opportunity for all our people.

This is the future within our grasp – so, together, let us seize it.

I have a funny feeling that there will be a change of leadership of the conservatives very soon so what this space.

Tories sold their souls to the devils

Here is short verse of Shelley:

‘Rise like Lions after slumber
In unvanquishable number—
Shake your chains to earth like dew
Which in sleep had fallen on you—
Ye are many—they are few.’

I had fond memories of one of my uncles who would take a book of the self, the book was full of dust he would clean the cover of the book with a clean cloth then he would sit us down to read the poem.
Andy Howe sums it eloquently in his article in Labour Uncut about high Labour expectations http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2017/06/28/expectations-for-labour-are-high-policy-is-the-way-for-jeremy-corbyn-to-meet-them/
Tories voted against Labour amendment to stop cuts to police, firefighters and paramedics and to end the pay cap on public sector workers including nurses. The Tories and DUP cronies got their majority to block Labour. Result – 309 – 323 (Majority 14) These Tories are not worthy of your vote and their words mean nothing to our brave firefighters, police, paramedics, nurses and public sector workers, next time the Tories seek your vote use every opportunity remind them of our public sector workers. Remember when Theresa May told a struggling nurse there was no ‘magic money tree?’
The Prime Minister has scraped together £1bn to spend on a deal with the DUP – but just 24 days ago she told a struggling nurse money doesn’t grow on trees
In the closing days of the election campaign, Theresa May told anyone who would listen that there was no ‘magic money tree’.
Some noted that the Prime Minister appears to have found one, because she’s managed to scrape together £1 billion to help her cling on to power.
She’s promised the DUP vast sums of cash to spend on projects in Northern Ireland, in return for which they’ve promised to prop up her minority government.
But just 24 days ago, she told a struggling nurse – who had seen real terms pay cuts for eight years – there was “no magic money tree.”
During a special edition of BBC Question Time, the nurse asked the Prime Minister: “My wage slips in 2009 reflect exactly what I see today – so how can that be fair in light of the job that we do?”Mrs May replied: “I recognise the job that you do, but we have had to take some hard choices across the public sector in relation to public sector pay restraint.
“We did that because of the decisions we had to take to bring public spending under control, because it wasn’t under control under the last Labour government.
“And I’m being honest with you in terms of saying we will put more money into the NHS, but there isn’t a magic money tree that we can shake that suddenly provides for everything that people want.”
Tory Defence Secretary Michael Fallon denied the Prime Minister telling a struggling nurse that money doesn’t grow on trees was “patronising.”
He said: “She was honest about pay restraint within the NHS.”
He said using the phrase “magic money tree” was drawing attention to the “Christmas tree of presents” inside the Labour manifesto that are not costed.”
Hear Ye, hear Ye, on this day 26 June 2017 Conservatives sold their souls to the devil in return for a sweetheart deal viz Confidence and Supply for the sum of £1b to save face in parliament. Thou art a boil for doing this deal with the Democratic Unionist Party https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Unionist_Party
Thou art right to be outraged at the idea that such nasty, regressive bigots as the DUP should wield disproportionate influence over our government, but while people are waking up to how batshit northern Irish politics is, I feel they don’t realize how neglected and poverty stricken it is. Fully concur that the whole of the UK needs investment in its infrastructure, but it feels like dog-in-a-manger politics to begrudge investment that the poorest region of the UK so desperately needs.

I’m not surprised about May’s disgusting deal with the DUP. She thinks she has hoodwinked us all into believing she thinks that her deal is anything other than a shameful bribery to let her remain in power. £1bn for ten votes! Doesn’t that make you rage. Consider this it cost us around £16.66 for each individual UK taxpayer to fund the Tories clinging onto power. Theresa May said she wants EU citizens living in the UK to stay after Brexit as she announced plans designed to put their “anxiety to rest”. All EU nationals lawfully resident for at least five years will be able to apply for “settled status” and be able to bring over spouses and children.
Those EU citizen who come after an as-yet-unagreed date will have two years to “regularise their status” but with no guarantees. Prime Minister told the Commons that she wanted to give reassurance and certainty to the 3.2m EU citizens in the UK as well as citizens of the three EEA countries and Switzerland who she said were an “integral part of the economic and cultural fabric” of the UK.
However, she said any deal on their future legal status and rights must be reciprocal and also give certainty to the 1.2m British expats living on the continent after the UK leaves the EU. It’s all silent from Tory voters and members are they happy to purchase votes, and  that each vote from the DUP to prop up the Tories will cost the UK taxpayer £100 Million pounds to the DUP a BILLION pounds, yes a feckin BILLION pounds that could be used for education, or the NHS, or to invest in this country to get people back to work, and with Brexit coming up don’t we need that money for all of the UK. Tory members please tell us, is all this ok with you lot, and can you confirm that this Is what you voted for. So there is a magic money tree after all, but only if you’re a Tory buying votes from extremists..
One wonder how the Tories would feel if this £ BILLION pounds was going to the EU where at least we get something back for our money..
Honestly, whilst I feel like using stronger language I have to be mindful when a Government abuses its people in this way, a Government is so arrogant with YOUR money, when a Government buys votes for a BILLION pounds with money we so desperately need, when a Government takes the piss like this then there really is no other option, and it will be their own doing. People are sick of this constant abuse of our money by greedy arrogant Tory politicians.
Surely if the Conservative government were being honest and upfront, the other parties would by logic, support their efforts to govern, if it was in the Nation’s interest to do so. What is it that the Conservative minority government are afraid of when roughly half of the population are represented by other MP’s?
Why do they need to ruin their chances of a comeback at a subsequent general election by prostituting themselves to  the likes of the DUP-a party known for its links to protestant terrorism in Northern Ireland and for its anti LBG rights and its anti-abortionist views. Even the Conservative leader in Scotland has her reservations because of her own sexuality and those newly elected Scottish MP’s are now going to be in a dilemma when it comes to their government’s need for votes. The SNP will be having a field day with this over the coming weeks and months. It is a well-known truism that the Tories when faced with a problem they just throw money at it. One can see that behaviour in the antics of people like Johnson and other ex bullingdon club boys- I call them boys for that’s all they are in their level of maturity.
To resolve their dilemma at present the money they have slung in the direction of the DUP pales into insignificance when one looks at the amount of money they are going to have to dish out to appease the rest of the mainland populace. Their hope that they can ride out the storm of protests is likely to fail, as the security services, already hard pressed to contain society is bursting at the seams with discontent and skill and manpower shortages.
I expect that during the next few months, if they survive there will be emergency legislation passed and malcontents, disaffected and the like who strongly criticise this cuckoo government will see efforts to close down their avenues of dissent. Corbyn’s popularity has reached the point of no return and as long as he does not fall into the Beatles trap of becoming ‘more popular than Jesus’, his little red manifesto will stand the test of time.
He has some excellent people around him. I watched Keir Starmer yesterday with admiration at how he clinically destroyed the three Brexiteers and how he parried sniping from the tories so that their ammo puffed like damp squibs in the chamber. These people, rather than Labour will now feel the pressure as the Tory controlled main stream media begin their hatchet jobs. Corbyn, being the leader he is knows how they work and is no doubt primed and ready to keep opening that DUP sore until it festers in the body of the Tories and they become too weakened through the political infection that they finally capitulate.
They cling desperately to May’s apron strings but I fear that it will all be in vain as she herself is so weakened by her recent actions following on from flawed decisions. We just wait and adopt a siege mentality and sooner or later we will starve them out.
As you may know, the Conservative Party reached an agreement with the DUP today to ensure that they are propped up and kept in power. This has cost us £1.5bn. Questions need to be answered as to how much Wales will now receive outside of the Barnett Formula as well. It is unfair if one part of the country receives more funds just to prop up a minority government. Tim Connor wrote an excellent article about young people see article below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/tim-connor/young-people-election_b_17321930.html

After weighing all the evidence I have to say it loud and clear that Tories sold their souls to the devils

Only time will tell if the prime minister survives

Theresa May reminds me of the original song of Don’t Cry For Me Argentina

Wow don’t know, whether to cry or knock my head around a brick wall over Theresa May apology to her cabinet ministers for her incompetence and mismanagement of the election manifesto. This remind me of a song Don’t Cry For Me Argentina.
This is very rich coming from Gavin Barwell “Anger over Brexit and austerity caused the Tories to lose seats and Labour had tapped into concerns about the impact of years of years of public sector pay freezes and that his party must do more to listen to Remain voters concern”. Could this be his retaliation reply for losing his Croydon Central seat.
Got to hand it to May for wittingly delaying the Queen Speech on the grounds of she is afraid of going to the Queen to let Labour to form a government as her on ministers are very desperate to save face by wanting this sweetheart deal with Democratic Unionists Party(DUP).
It’s no wonder why Arlene Foster is alleged to say “deal between DUP and Tories could be a tremendous opportunity for Northern Ireland”. In other words kiss my arise first and give us more money to play with our voters and we will open up the heavens and bring forth rain to save you mam. This will come as no surprise that Scotland and Wales would want to benefit in a similar way for any cash boost as well.
Already we are seeing the cracks unfolded for ex-prime minister Sir John Major to say “he is dubious about the idea and its impact on peace process”.
John Major and Maggie Thatcher who were the former prime ministers were responsible for introducing and action PFI to sell of mental health homes, and hospitals, and ridding the cleaning services in NHS by introducing the private sector into the NHS to do the cleaning of hospital wards.
George Osborne also said “The government not to change its economic strategy after being left without a commons majority. A so-called end to austerity would lead to a loss of economic credibility”.
Cor blimey, I would never in a million years would I have thought that I would concur with the former Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne calling “Theresa May   dead woman walking” who now is the editor of the Evening Standard.
David Cameron also said “Theresa May will have to listen to other parties as she reviews her Brexit strategy in the wake of the election. There would be pressure for a softer exit from the EU after his party did not win an election majority.
It’s very noticeable the former heavy weights of frontbenchers in Conservatives are coming out in force shooting warning shots to Theresa May to get her act together. David Cameron who gave the nation the referendum vote and he lost the vote decided to resign from politics and sucking up to EU by informing them he will win the referendum.It is said that a week in politics is a long time. I would like some answers from any Conservative members is what do you think of your dear leader, who is weak and wobbly leader, are you just waiting for the backstabbing Johnson to take the helm which he can always deny as much as he wants. He will still be keeping his eyes on ways how to stab his leader with the handle of the knife from behind the scenes.
What I don’t understand is during the campaign trail your dear leader did not want to have a face to face debate with her equal which made her look like a sausage am I missing something as some of your Conservative Supporters have said quietly that she should resign post general elections?
To put the icing on the cake because of a hung parliament they decided to go into a sweetheart deal with the Democratic Unionist Party(DUP) which already a representative is in Northern Ireland wittingly that the DUP has a anti gay and abortion policies and the Scottish Conservative leader is in panic mode with all the assurances in the world you can’t change a leopard spots it’s like eating very soggy rice.
The tide has turned again we have another hung parliament, Conservatives were eight seats short of an overall majority and they turned to DUP have concurred in principle a confidence and supply deal to support a Tory government. This maybe a conspiracy theory in return it looks like two of Theresa May advisors had to be banished into the wilderness or face a leadership challenge by her ministers.
Forgive me if I have my doubts I don’t have any confidence of a Conservative Government on the grounds of witnessing 18 years of underfunding in our public services and decimation of the manufacturing industries during my teenage years as it was more about loads of money to the private sectors and most of all greed.
Question needs to be answered as to why thousands of votes were not included in the results in Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, have I missed a trick or two or has the constituency have muggings written on their foreheads call me syndical for mentioning it in the public domain.
The Tories are on the ropes nationally and it looks like those who had previously refused to serve on Labour’s shadow cabinet under , are ready to serve now.
I don’t think Conservatives will last for very long it’s just not good enough to say “I got you in this mess and I will get you out of it”. Voters wants to see substances, job security, more investment in public services and local government.
Surely something must be done to address the rating cost of foreign package holidays and imported computer games help to push the UK inflation rate up to 2.9% last month from 2.7% in April. The latest inflation rate is the highest since June 2013, and above the Bank of England’s 2% target. The price of food and clothing also went up slightly but fuel is alleged to have fallen for a third month in a row. The pick up in inflation is likely to continue the squeeze on consumers. Theresa May need to address this urgently as foodbanks, soup kitchens, and homelessness continue to increasing rapidly people want action to be taken and not just giving the talk and not doing the walk.

The Guardian has been doing some analysis of the election result and has found some quite startling things:
Labour’s percent of share went up best in areas where the average income has risen the most since David Cameron’s Tories came to office in 2010. By contrast, the seats with the largest falls in income saw the highest increases in the Tory vote. The poorest seats in England saw the biggest Tory advances from 2015.
Turnout went up by the most in seats with a higher percent of young voters and students: this explains why Labour took Canterbury (For instance).
The education divide is also growing. Labour used to do much better with voters on lower education levels. However in 2010 and 2015, this pattern was reversed, and has continued to do so in 2017.
Give credit where it’s due, the Guardian puts it eloquently,” Britain’s class politics has been turned completely upside down in 2017. Wealthy professionals in leafy suburbs have swung behind a Labour leader who pledges to sharply increase their taxes, while it was struggling blue-collar workers in deprived and declining seats who were most attracted by the party of austerity cuts to public services and welfare.”
I would urge the Prime Minister should rethink its Brexit strategy, Social Care, more investments in public and civil services most importantly the disabled, mental health, learning disabilities, young and grey powers following last week’s election. For the PM to survive she should be more open and transparent to our nation if not she will not survive. On saying this I would rather have a Labour Government in power instead of a Conservative who are willing to do sweetheart deals with Democratic Unionist Party(DUP) only time will tell if the prime minister survives.

My thoughts on Local and Metro Mayoral Election results

It’s no surprise that Conservatives won four out of six new Metro Mayoral Elections which includes West Midlands, Tees Valley, Cambridge, and Peterborough. In kind, I take the view it’s better to have won two seats than none (Manchester and Liverpool). Some of our traditional Labour voters in some of our heartlands turned to UKIP as they were speaking their language then afterwards winning the Brexit argument they abandon them, they turned their attention towards the Conservatives which is very worrying times if Labour does not address this issue quickly.
There is no denying that the Conservatives have gained in council seats and mayoral elections by winning 11 new councils, and also holding on to their existing seats to form a majority, of course all the commenters will say that Labour will lose with high opinion polls indicating of high gains in the General Elections for the Conservatives. Intriguingly this reminds me of the old fart(Donald Trump) quoting fake news when he wants to promote positives and can’t get his way then he takes to twitter when he was receiving a battering in the opinion polls and the press. Well this is expected as the press and media are paid to sell their newspapers and to increase their readerships This brings me to the question how effective is any political parties with large membership if they don’t come out and help to get the votes for the political parties they are representing on the doorsteps to get any political party into power with a very clear message why they deserve your vote or have political parties gone very complacent to the extent they think that low turn outs is the business. Well I can put my hand on my heart and say this not acceptable and this trend needs to change now, not tomorrow. This election should have been about local issues such as street cleaning, investment in community centres, schools, parks, roadworks, nurseries, and street lighting but instead it’s been marred by national issues such as Brexit and personalities.

Here is a reminder to all feel free to watch this youtube:

It is alleged that local government elections count towards the results which party will hold the keys to number 10 Downing St, this is false on the grounds of its local parties decides what local issues that affect their wards which helps to build towards the local government policies to enhance to the quality of life in their wards. Most voters will vote on issues that impact on their lifestyles and what political party best represent them and when political parties get out of favour with the voters, voters are like marmite like it or not they get voted out to pave the way for a new government in waiting.
No doubt that there will be winners and losers in any elections which the democratic process has been resolved at the ballot boxes. The other side of the coin is some parties may continue to play the blame game and their lack of failures to look at the root causes of why they lost the elections and it’s just not good enough just giving a good talk and not taking action as voters will see through it they will vote for other parties with a heavy heart instead or they will refuse to vote. In all political parties there will be always be infighting between the so called left and right which really does not help as the public views it as a political party can’t get its act together. When this happens voters can only take so much before they vote for other political parties into office.
Not long ago the Conservatives were fighting amongst themselves and they were very unpopular at the time but they still managed to last for eighteen years in power. The voters in turn paved the way for New Labour to take office in 1997. They spoke in a language that the centre ground understood very well and they continued to vote Labour. About right now some people will be chocking on their breakfast, coffee, lunch, or dinner by mentioning this part of history that the Conservatives will want to bury and forget. (Nasty Party image)
Any political parties can have increase in membership, but does it really translate to influencing the voters to vote in a particular way. To the Jones and Smiths it means nothing to them unless it affects their bread and butter issues. Local turns out are different and normally lower than General Election turn outs.
I question what does taking back control of the UK means to you, as it mean different things to many things to all of us. Does it mean immigration or watering down workers’ rights, selling off our NHS, decreasing our Welfare System, more cuts to our public services or more of Brexit which are all vote winners depending which party will deliver.
The snap general elections was designed to cause maximum confusion for a Conservative win not just to the the traditional conservative heartlands but they had the intention of chipping away into Labour, Libdem, and UKIP heartlands, to win Local and Mayoral Elections Maggie Thatcher did very well during her time in office.
It is been alleged that more than 930,000 new voters have registered to vote in this forthcoming Snap General Elections of those, is said to be under 25s. The highest number of the registration online 147,000 and 3,364 paper forms being submitted was done during Theresa May speech and another surge on the day of local government elections on 4 May. Now is the time to go on Labour doorsteps to convince voters that Labour is the party for the many and not the few.
To put it very bluntly I don’t give a flying monkeys if you voted for Corbyn or not in the Labour leadership contest. What matters is we all have a duty to our party to get a Labour victory out to help form the next Labour Government on 8 June. Don’t let the Conservatives use the Ed Miliband’s tomb stone manifesto plan in 2015 to hoodwink the voters to gain a landslide victory for the Conservatives.

This is not intended to preach to the converted how to suck eggs, but to encourage the converted to take the message to the unconverted why it’s important not to lose their rights to vote in this snap General Elections called by the conservatives by stressing the importance of returning a Labour Government into office on 8 June as every vote counts for Labour leaving no stones unturned for this to happen both camps will have to work together for a Labour victory and don’t sit on the sidelines and play into the press and media just so they can sell their negative garbage to the electorates. Labour does have positive messages to promote and recognise they have a historical scale to win back power this can only happen when it’s members are united. It’s just not good enough taking selfies and thinking it’s good enough to win over voters or feeling safe over their comfort zone just being councillors or career politician. In a nutshell I urge all to put away your difference start to fight for the Labour Party. Remember “United We Stand, Divided We Fall”.
By my estimation we have four an half weeks to turn around some of the misfortunes that has accrued by learning from the lessons of Local and Mayoral Elections to convince voters that the Conservatives are for the rich and not for the working class and take the fight to the marginal seats to turn it into Labour seats. Let’s face it Ice Queen Theresa May is the reincarnation of Maggie Thatcher promoting Thatcherism in this election and make no mistake she will promote it for the 8 June Snap General Elections to gain a landslide victory. I’m sure as hell I don’t want to wake up on the morning of 9 June to see another Conservative in government do you, if not then now is the time to get active and do your duty for Labour by joining in our telephone banks, Branch Labour Parties, Constituency Labour Parties by actively helping out on Labour campaign trails for a Labour victory on 8 June

Satire:Time for Ice Queen Theresa May to change her tune

Here is something we all must be aware of which will make you cringe sitting in the comfort of your settee:

 

Notice how the establishment has immigration high on their agenda just like UKIP as the chancellor has suggested that foreign students and highly skilled workers. Funny enough this does not surprise me at all. Then the government release a statement stating the opposite by denying it and comes out with they are committed to bring net migration down below 100,000 I can only say that they don’t know what the left hand from their right hand is doing as it is a very sensitive issue to address. Somehow this smacks of Donald Trump by saying that he will build a wall the way to Mexico speech.

Michael Gove has been elected to a key body which will scrutinise the work of ministers in charge of Brexit.

The pro-Leave MP is one of ten Tories elected to the 21-strong Exiting the European Union Select Committee, which will have a wide remit to hold David Davis’ department to account.

This comes just months after Gove was sacked as Justice Secretary in the wake of Brexit.

Eight of the conservatives on the new committee backed Leave. Labour has put forward a team of five pro-Remain MPs, including the committee’s Chair, Hilary Benn, who will have a casting vote.

Along with Gove, the Tory team includes Alistair Burt, Maria Caulfield, Andrea Jenkyns, Jeremy Lefroy, Peter Lilley, Karl McKartney, Craig Mackinley, Dominic Raab and John Whittingdale.

Tory MPs Anna Soubry and Peter Bone were unsuccessful in their bids to sit on the committee.

Labour’s committee members include Stephen Timms, Emma Reynolds, Pat McFadden, and Seema Malhotra.

The committee will be almost double the size of nearly every other Commons select committee, a decision some MPs claim is a deliberate sabotage of its work, as it will be harder to reach consensus.

The SNP is to elect two members to the committee, while the Lib Dems, the Democratic Unionist Party, the SDLP, and Plaid Cymru will each chose one.

A major Lincolnshire employer has announced it is moving its headquarters to Europe as a direct result of the Brexit vote in June.

Anxiety over the cost of a hard Brexit, which would see the UK drifting away from cooperation with the rest of the EU, has compelled Smiffys to open a new headquarters in the Netherlands.

Elliott Peckett, director of Smiffys, said 40 per cent of the company sales go to the European Union, its largest trading partner, and he needs to be prudent. “The Government proclaim that they want to encourage Britain to export, but pursuing this hard Brexit approach has simply pulled the chair from beneath us and left us dangling. The simple answer is that we cannot afford to wait.

“During that time [the negotiating process], not only will Smiffys have lost valuable EU sales due to this uncertainty, as we are already experiencing, but we will have lost the opportunity to have acted to protect what are vital sales to our company. “Moreover, the fact that the pound is now at a 168-year record low against the dollar, according to the Bank of England, sums up the outlook for the UK economy under the approach that the Government are taking on Brexit.” The company, a costume and fancy dress supplier which employs 250 people across its two sites in Gainsborough and Leeds, has been based in the UK for more than 120 years.

Mr Peckett said: “Smiffys have no choice but to protect our business by moving our headquarters to the EU. This will allow us to continue growing our trade to the EU, from within the single market.”

Prior to joining the Single Market Smiffys exported only a tiny fraction of their current sales to the EU.

“Both Smiffys and its European customers were then faced with bureaucratic and administrative barriers, not to mention the costly import duties that our products attracted, making us uncompetitive,” Mr Peckett explained.

“Going back to these times would feel like a step back in time and a lost opportunity to freely access a trading bloc of over 500 million people,” he added.

Another concern for the company is the uncertainty surrounding its workforce as it employs over a dozen European staff.

“All we have heard from the Government is that it is highly unlikely that they will be allowed to stay and work for us. If this is the case, this will remove Smiffys’ ability to communicate as well as we currently do with our EU customers,” Mr Peckett said.

Smiffys’ announcement comes as banks and financial firms warned they could start making decisions to move assets out of the UK as early as 2017if there is no deal in place to maintain their rights to sell services freely across the EU.

Open Europe, which took a neutral stance on the referendum, warned that losing access to the single market could cost banks in the UK as much as £27bn, or a fifth of their annual revenue.

On Thursday, Nicolas Mackel, the head of financial development for Luxembourg, said a string of overseas banks and fund managers had explored moving London staff to the tiny country since the Brexit vote.

A senior Tory ally of David Cameron has suggested that Cabinet ministers and the public who back ‘Hard Brexit’ are “stupid”.

Lord Hill, a former EU Commissioner and Leader of the Lords under the ex-PM, warned that the UK had to decide if it wanted to leave the EU with most of its trade links intact, or preferred to make migration curbs a priority.

“I think we have this kind of false choice in the UK often between ‘hard Brexit’ and ‘soft Brexit’,” Hill told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme.

“I think the choice is between stupid Brexit and more intelligent Brexit and that is what we need to go for.

“My whole approach to this would be that if we approach it in a sensible way, because the European system is a deal-based system, there is more scope for trying to resolve it intelligently than if we go at it in a way where we all end up shouting at each other.”

‘Hard Brexit’ is used in Westminster to describe a clean break with the EU’s single market tariff-free system on goods, while imposing strict visa controls on immigrants. Some MPs suspect that Brexit Secretary David Davis, Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson and International Trade Secretary Liam Fox are prepared to put the UK on World Trade Organisation tariffs rather than remain members of the EU market.

Lord Hill, who resigned as the EU’s Commissioner for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union soon after the referendum vote, even claimed that many EU leaders felt Britain was too smart to really quit the EU.

The row came as Theresa May faced the humiliation of seeing Brexit discussed right at the end of a working dinner in Brussels at her first EU summit.

Lord Hill’s remarks followed an outspoken David Davis ( Brexit Secretary) by former Greek finance minister Yanis Varoufakis.

The former member of the left-wing government in Athens told the BBC’s Question Time that Davis was running a “Pythonesque department of exit, staffed by several people of very low IQ”. Lord Hill, a long-time ally of Cameron, announced his resignation from his Brussels post just two days after the Brexit vote on June 23.

His comments today sparked a swift backlash from one senior Tory MP, “Suggesting millions of British voters are ‘stupid’ didn’t work for the Remainers in the EU referendum, did it?

“Lord Hill threw his toys out of his pram in June, preferred to flounce off to make money. Hardly surprising as his EU steer to Cameron was so duff. Would you want strategic advice from him?”

On Question Time, Varoufakis refused to name any Brexit department staffers who might be of low IQ, saying these were already well known. UK establishment Brexit Minister (David Davis) to visit his counterpart Micheal Russell in Scotland what transpired his visit since the vote to leave the EU at the roundtable discussion with business figures. All I can say god help us all. As this is not enough embarrassment now transpired that that there is so much u-turn from the UK establishment’s Brexit secretary any arrangements to leave the EU would be a UK deal.

A former Treasury civil servant (Sir Brian Unwin) has eloquently put it by stating that the Brexit Minister (David Davis) is in cloud cuckoo land if he believes Brexit talks are heavily weighted in favour of UK, the Brexit Minister and other should rein back hard and unconstructive talk. The UK has said it will begin formal talks about existing the European Union (EU) by the end of March 2017.

It is alleged that thousands of High Street pharmacies in England could face closure after ministers confirm plains to after the funding system and make cuts. The Department of Health confirmed that they want to reduce the budget by £2.8 billion a year by more than £2 million over the next two years. It has been suggested cuts on this scale could lead up to 3,000 of the 11,700 pharmacies being closed.

We know that Ice Queen Theresa May is in Brussels to talk about Brexit and she is keeping the cards very close to her chest by giving little information to the 28 leaders. To be frank this leads me to strongly believe that she does not know how to move forward on this. The media and public are more focused on the infighting of Labour Party instead of looking at Conservatives who are also doing their infighting with the likes of the three brexiters who occupy the front benches of government. It is further evident that the establishment wants Britain to be part of EU decision-making until Brexit with our negotiating is completed with the summit affecting all 28 members’ states are being discussed.

Its alleged by a former senior police officer (Peter Sheridan) who is now chief executive at Cooperation Ireland warned that Brexit could lead to civil unrest in Northern Ireland and went further to mentioned about the a fragile peace process with the numerous agreements that made up Northern Ireland’s peace process show the brittle nature of its politics and less than a year ago, both governments had to step in to rescue the executives.

I wholeheartedly support the Welsh First Minister by saying for full and unfettered access to the single market. Leaders of the UK’s devolved governments must not undermine Brexit negotiations. Ice Queen Theresa May has offered the Welsh Government a formal seat in the talks to shape the UK’s EU exit strategy. The joint ministerial council which includes Carwyn Jones and the prime minister, met for the first time since 2014.

It’s no surprise that Ice Queen Theresa May has predicted that there will difficulties ahead with the summit leaders to Brexit. She felt it was like a deadlock over landmark EU-Canada trade deal.

Just when we thought we saw the end of George Osborne was parked to the backbenches and out of sight, he is like the prince of darkness read to take a bite by quoting he made mistakes in EU referendum campaign and failed to understand the anger felt by many leave voters. He went to say many voters felt completely disconnected and don’t feel part of the national economy that worked for them.

Establishment borrowing rose by more than expected to £10.6 billon in September according to figure from the Office National Statistics (ONS). The figure was £1.3 Billon higher than the same month last year. For the financial year to date between April and September, borrowing by £2.3 billon to £45.5 billon.

I support the call from the Local Government Association to hold talks with town hall bosses to give councils more building powers to build houses where they are needed and to be freed from restrictions on ability to borrow to fund new home building which includes powers to replace council homes that are sold off as quickly as possible. I’m not convinced that the establishment will grant it instead they rather give the talk but can’t do the walk, the walk. They rather stick to the line of the government is delivering on its commitment to replace all properties sold on a one for one basis.

Anthony Browne British Bankers Association (BBA) quotes leading UK banks are preparing to relocate amid fears over the impact of Brexit negotiations sometime next year over fears around Brexit and smaller banks could move operations overseas by 2017. Their hands are quivering over the relocation button. He further commented most banks had backed the UK remaining in the EU. The current public and political debate at the moment is taking us in the wrong direction.

It’s about time that Jeremy Corbyn challenged Ice Queen Theresa May over shambolic Tory Brexit by saying the establishment has no plan for UK departure and highlighted for clarity and warned of the effect of Brexit on the border.

Jeremy Corbyn took a swipe at the Prime Minister for her inaction over Brexit by saying that her so-called plan is akin to those Blackadder’s loyal dogsbody Baldrick would have devised.

The Labour leader mocked Theresa May’s “chaotic” lack of strategy by insisting that the hapless BBC sitcom character is the only “great philosopher” whose thinking he could detect in current Tory policy.

Mr Corbyn when he said: “On Monday, you told the House: ‘We have a plan which is not to set out at every stage of the negotiations the details.’

“I’ve been thinking about this for a couple of days. I think when searching for the real meaning and the importance behind the Prime Minister’s statement, you have to consult the great philosophers.

“The only one I could come up with is Baldrick, who says: ‘Our cunning plan is to have no plan.’

“Brexit was apparently about taking back control but the devolved governments don’t know the plan, businesses don’t know the plan, Parliament doesn’t know the plan.

“When will the Prime Minister abandon this shambolic Tory Brexit and develop a plan that delivers for the whole country?”

Ms May suggested it was “interesting” that Baldrick actor Sir Tony Robinson was a Labour member, implying that he had left the party.

Mr Robinson tweeted to confirm that he is still a member after 40 years despite being a vocal critic of Mr Corbyn.

The actor ridiculed the state of government by tweeting: “If [Brexit Secretary] David Davis needs any help with Brexit, Baldrick stands ready to serve.”

Ms May outlined a vague plan for Brexit for which the process is expected to start next March in invoking Article 50.

She said: “We’re going to deliver on the vote of the British people, we’re going to deliver the best possible deal for trade in goods and services with and operation within the European Union, and we’re going to deliver an end to free movement.

“That’s what the British people want and that’s what this government is going to deliver for them.”

So in a nutshell she has nothing to offer and it’s time she changed her tune and come up a Brexit plan.

 

 

Where is our NHS 350 million pounds was that was promised to us

I’m not one bit surprised by the media intentions towards David Cameron they were all over him from the beginning then they spat him out as soon as he lost the referendum by saying that he was the worst Prime Minister in history see article below:

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/david-cameron-rated-one-of-the-worst-prime-ministers-in-modern-history_uk_57ff5845e4b0ee335211a53b

What has the nation learned today let’s begin with the establishment was taken to High Court over Brexit. If the establishment had its way they would not give parliament its approval to give the house a vote. Therefore I’m glad that this has been resolved by the court to clarify that the need for parliament to give its approval before the Brexit process starts is of huge constitutional importance. QC Lord Pannick said the case raises an issue concerning the limits of the power of the executive. According to the attorney general Jeremy Wright, Ice Queen Theresa May does not require consent from Parliament to go ahead with getting Brexit under way, it was proper and established principle that government use the royal prerogative in such cases. Now it is claimed the house will have a vote after all then all of a sudden there will be no secord referendum See article below:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/1994117/theresa-may-does-not-need-mps-approval-for-brexit-because-it-is-the-will-of-the-people-court-hears/

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/20/theresa-may-to-tell-eus-other-leaders-there-will-be-no-second-referendum

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37691270

It is said that the Foreign Secretary (Boris Johnson) has promised that those who prophesied doom over Brexit will be proven wrong. Well Joker Johnson there is a saying that a promise is a comfort to a fool. How about acknowledging that hate crimes have increased post Brexit against EU citizens, foreign nationals, Jews and Muslims in U.K. and what is the Conservatives are doing to address this issue. People don’t want lip services they want to see action taken against the perpetrators.

Intriguingly it now transpired that Joker Johnson (Boris Johnson) decided he wanted to support the remain camp then was hoodwinked into believing that if he supported the remain campaigner he would hamper his chances of succeeding his leadership campaign in the conservatives so he decided to switch over to the Brexit camp with a promise that he will become leader. See article below:

http://news.sky.com/story/boris-johnsons-secret-remain-article-revealed-10619546

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/post-brexit-hate-crime-racism_uk_57ff7bf6e4b0e982146c0ac1

For all the spin that the establishment gives on Brexit it’s no wonder why Nissan is in panic mode and seeking assurances that the establishment that they will continue to keep UK a competitive nation to do business after it leaves the EU.  Thanks to the people who voted for Brexit people are being to see a raise in prices like household items, food, mobile, gas, and electricity bills.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/post-brexit-hate-crime-racism_uk_57ff7bf6e4b0e982146c0ac1

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37688593

Michael Wilshaw in a must-read interview in the guardian newspaper more grammars “will actually lower standards for the great majority of children. That is my view. And it is socially divisive as well.” He can’t understand May’s assertion that grammars can be introduced in a way that lifts up all schools, and is aghast at her claim that the plans will not mean a return to a “binary system”. “What does that mean? If you are taking away the most able kids from the comprehensive system, you’re creating by another name secondary moderns. You can call it what you like It’s been alleged fewer than half of England’s grammar schools give poor pupils priority in allocating places. An analysis of the 163 grammar schools’ admissions policies found 90 do not take account of a child’s eligibility for free school meals. Then add David Morgan’s comments and article below:

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/oct/15/sir-michael-wilshaw-politicians-inevitably-come-up-against-people-like-me-chief-inspector-schools

In light of this the question I will to all the political parties in the UK now the vote for Brexit has taken place how many MEPs will continue stand for the European Parliament now Brexit has taken place. Moreover, will UKIP still continue to stand as candidates In European Parliament as their continued to be leaderless or will we see the return of Nigel Farage to emerge as the new leader of the one man party (UKIP).

Wow this something that is not new, now Steven Wolf decides that he will quite UKIP and go as an independent. See article below:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/17/ukip-mep-steven-woolfe-quits-party

Somehow I’m reassured that Labour Party have asked 170 questions to parliament to get some answers about the establishment position for the economy post Brexit to get an idea of the government stance.

The establishment should be ashamed of themselves for cutting Mental Health budget they give in one hand and take on the other hand. It was the Thatcher Government that started the cuts in Mental Health and Learning Disability hospitals and closed some of the hospitals and homes to sell it to the highest bidders who then in turned decided to not to build on the land just to wait until the right time to build luxury apartments. I take no lessons about blaming Labour mismanagement of the economy from the conservatives. How strange that even the King’s Fund have come out in favor of investing more funding in our NHS and at Prime Minister Question Time Ice Queen Theresa May was ducking the questions. See article from King’s Fund below:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/news/2016/october/prime-ministers-questions-19-october-2016/

http://www.kingsfund.org.uk/press/press-releases/commitments-increase-mental-health-funding-not-reaching-front-line?utm_source=email&utm_medium=social&utm_term=socialshare

Let’s be honest it was the Conservatives who to introduce Private Finance Initiative(PFI) which they did in small parts during Thatcher and Major reign and when Labour got into power they carried on with much of the policy in public services.

I do seem to recall that a certain Boris Johnson saying that if the nation votes to leave the EU that our NHS will be better off out of EU by £350 million. If this is the case where is the money gone to as our NHS could do with this money now. An MP is demanding the health secretary investigates how a private firm running dozens of GP surgeries and NHS walk-in centres is handling its finances.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-37656059

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/brexit-vote-leave-wipes-nhs-350m-claim-and-rest-of-its-website-after-eu-referendum-a7105546.html

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/04/theresa-may-refuses-to-guarantee-brexit-pledges-on-immigration-and-nhs