Tag Archives: Council Tax

Satire: Tories are in trouble again


Here is something to remember about Ice Queen May see youtube:

I have to say that the media have been very biased towards Jeremy Corbyn over the past three years he has received more than his share of bashing, but when it comes to subject such as Brexit it is alleged he is very vague I would beg to differ this is on the grounds of when Labour tries to put their message across to the press, the press who are the Tories friends will put a different spin on it which will put a damper on it which is why Ice Queen has gotten away with murder. A lot of people fear the various spin on Brexit which may bankrupt the country and you don’t have to be brainwashed by any media to feel this way. What a fracking joke, hey mates wake up and smell the very strong coffee the table has just turned on Theresa May for a change. Who remembers the Tories promise that they will be the party that will cap care home fees 2020.  Well it’s no surprise that Tories ditch plan to cap care home fees by 2020. An absolute disgrace, this means, in essence, anyone needing care could unless extremely wealthy, lose their home; they struggled for years to buy. This must be opposed, enough is enough.

Cough, cough, cough, cough, cough oh why, oh why did a spider called Jeremy Corbyn came along to disrupt Theresa May by handing Ice Queen May her P45 whilst she was in full flow of her speech Jeremy Corbyn claimed that this P45 was from Boris Johnson. He turn to Boris I have given the P45 to Theresa. The speech was to relaunch her career and assert her authority as leader. Indeed, it was a disaster, and Theresa May, maybe gone within days or months. She started to cough her way through a set of weak, rehashed policies which was cherry picked of Labour policies and in Labour manifesto some by Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn. Strangely some of letters in the empty slogan behind her peeled off and fell to the floor.  In her conference speech the Prime Minister proposed to take just a few of our policies and heavily watering them down. That won’t work.

Check out this from youtube from a man that is very much liked

This will not come as a surprise to us remember two of Labour manifesto commitments to cap energy prices and build more council housing it transpires the conservatives were trying to outdo Labour by adopting labour policies have the Conservatives become the party for desperation to get social policies on their agenda that they end up announcing more u-turns by adopting Labour policies when it suits them Whilst I’m very happy for the conservatives adopting Labour policies at their conference at least give Ed Miliband and Jeremy Corbyn the credit where its due instead of claiming it’s a conservative policy, I’m sure people will remember Trade Union Congress and Labour’s Living Wage policy only for the Conservative to claim it was their policy.

The Tory plan to roll out universal credit across the country may be a good idea in principal and in theory. However if I was a teacher and I had to mark it out of ten I would give five out of ten. I would consider the timing of it to ascertain whether it was wrong as one side does not fit all to individuals each case should be on merits not all individuals can budget on a monthly base. The idea that workers gets paid on a monthly bases is great the government seemed to forgot that there workers that receive their pay on a weekly bases as well. I foresaw the former coalition government wanted the universal credit implemented forthwith which was ill-judged and cruel for this reason I will deduct five points for causing misery to many people who are on benefits and low pay workers depends on benefits to help them out with child care and have to wait up to six weeks to receive their payment as an average worker only waits for four weeks to receive their salary. Councils and housing associations are braced for a surge in rent arrears and evictions as the introduction of the dreaded Universal Credit come into force. See the link below:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/oct/08/councils-fear-surge-in-evictions-as-universal-credit-rollout-accelerates?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Now folks here is the burning question who do you think will take over the leadership of the Conservatives and hold a General Elections. If they are not ready then move aside and let a Labour Government run the country.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

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.

Run,Madam May run, run, run away


Its about time that Theresa may take notice and do the nation a very big favor continue to run away.

Firstly, well done to Lewis Hamiltion for coming first place and took outright championship lead in the Italian Grand Prix for the first time in this season on Sunday 3 September 2017 with a four point lead and I wish him all the best for Hamiltion in the Singapore Grand Prix on 15 – 17 September. Now that I got this out of the way down to more serious business of the day.
Police morale is at a all time low among three in every five police officers. The Police Federation poll shown the treatment of the pay service as a whole pay and work life balance were having the biggest impact on morle. The proportion of officers planning to leave the service within two years was up from 11.8% last year to 12.3%. To top it off policing in England and Wales is facing a shortage of staff and raising crime. Policing services are based on fewer people working more hours and days. All the Home office can say in their defence policing offered competitive pay and a good pension. So in a nutshell take what you get from abusive public and get on with your job or else face the sack.
To be very frank, I whole heartily support the call from the NHS for a  bail out unless it is properly funded the service will be the worst winter in recent history if it does not receive an emergency bailout. The cash is needed to pay for extra staff and beds on the grounds of extra attempts to improve finances have failed. The conservative government has given councils an extra one billon pounds for social care strives to help relieve the pressure on hospitals. The feeble response from the Department of Health the “NHS has prepared for winter more this year than ever before” is unacceptable in my opinion as it is opening the floodgate of backdoor deals to privatisation on a large scale so be warned.
There comes a time to say enough is enough to Jeremy Hunt and a hat tip to Stephen Hawkings for speaking out against privatisation of our NHS. Keep Public Service public which side are you on. See article below:
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/aug/18/stephen-hawking-blames-tory-politicians-for-damaging-nhs?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
Well we all guessed what the reply from Jeremy Hunt would be and I would not expect anything else from the toffee nose which goes like this Jeremy Hunt has accused Stephen Hawking of a “pernicious” lie after the physicist said it seemed the Tories were steering the UK towards a US-style health insurance system. See article below:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/19/jeremy-hunt-says-stephen-hawking-is-wrong-on-the-nhs?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

What a jerk Theresa May has become on the one hand she is trying to woo the working class by enticing them with left wing policies to make a convincing argument to gain our trust then using right wing arguments to win over natural conservatives its no wonder why she is under pressure from her backbenchers and she is doing what she can to keep her position and at the same time keeping her backbenchers at bay to maintain control of the Conservatives. Hence her speech in Japan she wants to stay as leader and Prime Minister into the next general elections. During her leadership for the conservative party in October 2016 she said that directors must be held to account and be transparent with their pay and under her leadership they will have to change alas this is not to be a sad day indeed. Sunday 27 August 2017 Theresa May took to the Sunday mail to write a hasty article by stating business who pay excessive salaries to senior executives represent the “unacceptable face of capitalism”. The “excesses” of some bosses was undermining confidence the social fabric of our country”. Firms should that face revolts over salaries and bonuses will be named on a new public register. If she thinks it will win over the minds of working class its no wonder that all the trade unions said it was feeble.
The nation is aware of a police are purportedly investigating the claims of a call centre in Neath to canvassing voters during the General Elections 2017 campaign. It’s no surprise the Tories quoting they don’t comment on a on going investigations.
Can anybody imagine United Kingdom divided over partition take for instance Pakistan, India, Bangladesh or Hong King are some clear examples which was part of British empire and dare I say it British imperialism. Whilst I acknowledge independence is important, there are nations are ruled by dictators and it’s citizens are monitored by the government. Citizens should not be afraid of its government but the governments should be afraid of its people. Governments continue to make promises and voters has to be reminded that a promise is a comfort to a fool.
It’s alleged that net migration has fallen to the lowest level for three years after a surge in the number in the number of EU nationals leaving the UK since June  Brexit vote. The net migration the difference between those entering and leaving the UK fell 81,000 to 246,000 in the year to march 2017. More than half that change is due to a decrease in net migration of EU citizens which is down 51,000.
High five and hat tip to Micheal Barnier the EU chief negotiator has raised concerns about the progress of UK Brexit negotiations. It’s just not good enough for Theresa May to appeal for unity from pro-EU conservative MPs as Commons is set to debate the government Brexit repeal bill. The bill seen as key plank of the government Brexit policy transfers EU law into UK legislation there will be proper scrutiny but some MPs fear it will give ministers sweeping new powers
I’m very glad of labour position of considering keeping the UK in the EU single market and customs union for a transitional period after leaving the EU. I’m even more intrigued by four articles by two Labour MPs and a Labour MEP see articles below:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/21/chuka-umunna-labour-must-distance-itself-from-tories-on-brexit?CMP=share_btn_link

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2017/aug/26/labour-calls-for-lengthy-transitional-period-post-brexit?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/single-market-brexit-labour-keir-starmer-plan-could-cause-theresa-may-to-unravel-a7916606.html

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-housing-crisis-uk-just-lost-its-biggest-funder-a7909886.html

My message to Theresa May on her return to Parliament is continue to run around like a headless chicken and do continue to run, madam Theresa May run so a Labour government can get on with the job for the many and not for the few in the interest of our nation.

My Thoughts on the Repeal Bill


Here is something that we should remember:

Who gives a flying monkeys about the outcome of European Union which has divided this nation of ours on political ideology. To those who continued not vote will always say they are all in each other’s pockets and they are the same and will continue to do more of the same. Or they seem to have this notion of a conspiracy theory no matter what you say to them. It’s only when people start to lose some benefits that they enjoy or the government starts to take some form of action that affects people who some thing has to give before people starts to come out to vote to change the system.
Staggering how many Brexit supporters have no basis for their arguments. When faced with facts they reply with a belief? Yet cannot say what it is that makes them believe. All European Nations can control their borders already, if they chose to do so. If a person has no money or job and has not succeeded in finding work they can if enforced be told to leave the nation. Yet in the UK we do not operate that EU law because the cost of deporting people would be high as you would need to invest in greater numbers of officers and admin to ensure happens.
Yet the argument that leaving the EU will take back control of borders is bogus, one because the EU law shows the EU nations already have ability to do just that. Two because leaving will not end migration and most of which comes from outside the EU, but because we need people to fill jobs in the economy.
Brexit was based on a dislike of foreign people, it’s no good pretending it was not because if that was not the case Brexiteers would be able to offer a principle case for their reason. Yes some will hate Europe for other reasons, but when faced with reality immigration was used by the Leave camp during the referendum as the driving issue, for everything else they called any concerns as project fear.
Well as stated then there was no project fear just reality. We have the worst performing economy out of the whole EU since the Referendum and it’s getting worse. At some point the penny will drop because Brexit is not going to happen. Regardless what May say the reality will take hold that there is no positives to leaving.
Not long now before Brexit becomes too hot for the Government or any political party that thinks it can ignore the real will of the people. In addition to this poll 54% want Brexit stopped and that is a far higher than the 37% who voted to leave. Brexit was never right, it was un-British and undemocratic in how the Referendum was run. Lies, distorted facts, the use of Twitter Bots to create fake accounts, trolling and deception was rife by the leave side. There was no balance and nobody was asking the real questions on what was causing the anger. Europe means values, shared culture and history, working and human rights, environmental law, animal welfare protection, joint operations to tackle international crime and terrorism, jobs, trade and a strength for the UK though its biggest export, influence. The fraction it cost is paid back many times and we all benefit from being part of something bigger. Free movement gives people opportunities that simply would never exist outside of the EU.
Europe is positive, Brexit is nothing but a negative that will greatly harm living standards and already is. Fewer jobs, higher inflation with goods costing more to buy and just more weak or stagnant wages. Nobody on the Brexit side has spelled out one single positive for leaving the UK. Time to get real, Brexit can be stopped because the real will of the people is far stronger than any political hijacking of what that means.
The Scottish and Welsh governments have threatened to block the key Brexit bill which will convert all existing EU law into UK law. The repeal bill published earlier is also facing from Labour and other parties in the commons. Ministers are alledged to be optimistic about getting it through and ongoing intense dialogue with the devolved administration.
Welsh First Minister(Carwyn Jones) said the Repeal Bill to convert current EU laws into UK law was a naked power-grab which he could not support. Theresa May has been warned of immense constitutional crisis if she goes ahead with a key Brexit bill without devolved governments consent.
Give credit where its due for Maybot to suspend a Conservative MP. The Tories are more worried that they have lost one MP over a racist remarks during a Brexit fringe meeting. I’m sure the MP in concern will not be losing any sleep over her remarks. Let me be clear about this for a moment, this government of ours wants a cross party consensus on the table in Brexit negotiations who are you kidding Maybot could it be that the minority government has crashed into a brick-wall as European Union will reject the current proposal submitted by the government and the Conservative Backbenchers want their pound of flesh by wanting their dear leader to fail and a change of leadership challenge. Although the conservatives won with a small majority on the grounds of “Maybot just realised she can not depend on her backbenchers and Democratic Unionist Party(DUP) if this is the case then she might as well step down as the leader of her party and let someone else lead the Conservatives. So much for the Conservatives spin on “No deal is better than a bad deal”. This comes as no surprise for the Foreign Secretary told MPs European Union can go whistle for any extortionate final payment from the UK on Brexit and the government had no plan for what to do in the event of no deal being agreed with the EU. The sums he has seen that they proposed to demand from this country appear to be extortionate. Go whistle seems to him an entirely appropriate expression.
Brexit Secretary has said the lack of a Northern Ireland is a slightly problematic in terms of trying to resolve the future of the Irish border. He further suggested that technology and trusted traders schemes could help maintain a frictionless boarder when the UK leaves the customs union. Work had begun these area but was nowhere near a solution. He was giving evidence to a House of Lords committee.
British Standards Institution gave evidence to Lords Committee that they were optimistic the UK would retain its current role determining global rules in areas such as product safety. They warned that countries could make life difficult if politically motivated. A desire to do deals may see the UK sleepwalk into problems. The UK’s membership of European bodies that set industry-wide business standards cannot for granted after Brexit.
Michael Banier(Brexit Negotiator) said “The British position does not allow those persons concerned to continue to live their lives as they as they do today. There is still major differences between the EU and UK on the rights of EU citizen living in Britain. The European Court of Justice must have jurisdiction to guarantee citizens rights. It was essential that the UK recognise it’s financial obligations.
Labour Leader said that Labour will set out visions for Brexit when he meets the EU’s chief negotiator in Brussels. He will tell Michael Barnier he is ready to take up the responsibility for Brexit negotiations if there is a change in government. Michael Barnier will hold separate meetings with the First Minister(s) of Wales, and Scotland but insists he will only negotiate with the UK government
Ed Vaizey former minister told members of parliament the UK was proposing to leave the body on technically when it was actually distinct from EU urging a rethink. The government should publish legal advice regarding its decision to leave the European nuclear regulator.
Bob Neill said it would not be the first time legal advice given to ministers was incorrect.
Sir Amyas Morse( UK’s Public Spending watchdog) said had to be more united or the project would fall apart at the first tap like the segments of the chocolate treat. It needs to be coming through as uniform, a little bit more like a cricket ball. The government’s vague Brexit plan has been compared to a chocolate orange.
Intriguingly Damian Green(the First Secretary of State) deputized for Theresa May for Prime Minister Questions Time(PMQ) said “ The risk of the UK leaving the EU without any kind of deal is overstated. Both sides wanted a successful outcome. In reply Emily Thornberry said the Tories were in a mess over Brexit and urged ministers to get a grip and there were contingency plans for any failure to get a deal but the public were left in the dark.

Some of the comments were taken of my Facebook page like Bill Lees and John Chapman made some valid points which the Leader of Labour Party need to mention if Labour is going to influence the debate on the repeal bill:

Bill Lees wrote: Brexit is an unmitigated disaster and it’s simply not possible to negotiate any sort of exit deal that means the UK would be better off by relinquishing our membership of the EU than it would be by remaining in. This is becoming more apparent to more and more people with every day that passes, and it seems obvious that the much fetishised “will of the people” is no longer represented by the gerrymandered, non-binding, lie-driven result of the vote over 12 months ago.  It’s high time Labour stopped trying to pretend otherwise and started to represent the 48% plus of the referendum electorate that voted Remain, or would have done had they not been disenfranchised, most of which are natural Labour voters. It may indeed, be a matter simply of timing. Perhaps Jeremy Corbyn does indeed have a cunning plan, but his history of opposition to the EU makes me doubt it.  Interestingly though, the logic of Labour’s position, as outlined by Keir Starmer, implies that we actually are opposed to Brexit. Unlike the Tories, we have explicitly ruled out the possibility of departing the EU with “no deal”.  We also say that one of the key tests that we will apply as to the acceptability of any putative deal presented just before March 2019 is that the deal will have to deliver “the exact same benefits” (quoting David Davis!) as we currently enjoy via our membership of the EU, the Single Market, and the Customs Union. Which of course, is quite impossible to achieve, and would guarantee that any deal would be unacceptable and therefore rejected by Labour.  This does not seem to have been picked up, either by much of the electorate (hence Labour’s relative success/ avoidance of a massacre at the GE) , or much of the commentariat.  I’d like to see that position made more explicit. Again, it may simply entail biding our time until the disastrous true nature of Brexit is realised by more people and a detectable groundswell arises in favour of rejecting Brexit.  But the thing I really do find trying is the constant contortionism to try to demonstrate that we aren’t “going aganst the will of the people”) . We need to start characterising the referendum for what it was – a gerrymandered, non-binding opinion poll on a restricted electorate with no threshold built-in to ensure certainty for such a major constitutional change, the outcome of which was determined via blatant lies, distorted propaganda, and appeals to racist attitudes.

John Chapman wrote: Unfortunately, amongst a sizeable section of working class voters whom Labour needs to attract, there is no evidence that the dire results of Brexit are becoming more and more apparent. I quote in evidence swings from Labour to Conservative in last week’s local By-elections in Coleshill South and Middlesborough Ayresome. In both cases Conservatives hoovered up former UKIP votes. An approach that is more respectful of the EU Referendum result appears to be indicated if we are ever to achieve our objectives.  Well, Bill referring to the claim that in the GE former Kippers swung behind Labour in Northfield,there’s no way of knowing if that’s the case. Nationally, YouGov indicated  that the Tories actually had a a majority in social classes C2DE and Labour ( surprisingly) had a majority amongst ABC1 social classes, hence the actual anti-Labour swings in many mainly working class seats outside of major cities.. Hopefully, the march of events will change this situation, and open an opportunity for the approach you favour. However,the two recent By-elections that I quoted don’t seem to indicate that that’s happened yet

The leader of the Labour Party was right to say he can supply her with a copy of Labour manifesto in place of the Conservative manifesto and call for another early election. Don’t you just love it there are those who will be saying there is no magic money tree, if this is the case they find the magic money tree for the sum of 1.5 Billion pounds in favor of confidence and supply deal with the DUP and our public service workers are not receiving a proper pay deal(1% pay-cap) how is it fair to public sector workers and on the other hand the private sector get a 3.3 pay increase.

 

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 after general elections


Who can recall this message to the Nation from Ice Queen Theresa May:

Congratulations to those who refuse to vote and think everything will remain the same or continue to think that politicians are the same you have played right to the conservatives hands. Well done. In return the Conservatives continues to stuck two fingers at you and say thanks for the low turn out. Now you will have the following to consider of more of the continuation of the same of the Conservatives who just don’t care:

Brexit divided the country and will continue to be more of the same. I want to see the Nasty Party deliver a Brexit which put jobs, the economy and living standards first. Many EU citizens have made their Homes in UK. For the first time in modern history, the political and corporate elite who have ruled the UK for decades are edging dangerously close to being removed by the people.

After seven years of a Conservative Government, the majority of people in the UK are worse off. The poor have got poorer and those in the middle are increasingly finding it difficult.

Wages have stood still, while people in work have seen job security and working decline. Small businesses are struggling and cuts in welfare have hit working families who rely on tax credits, while many of those on benefits have been unfairly targeted and sanctioned.

Throughout the UK has been hit particularly hard by local government funding. This has put a squeeze on what can all city councils can deliver for local residents. Rent in the private sector are raising. Homelessness is increasing rapidly across all councils.

Anyone who works in the National Health Service or uses it as a patient, knows how stretched it is. It is harder to get a GP appointment and hospital waiting lists have risen. Meanwhile, £4.6bn in Tory cuts has created a crisis in social care.

The Conservatives are determined and eventually privatise state education. Forcing all schools to become academies bringing back grammar schools and selection and wasting vast sums on so called ‘Free Schools’ are part of their plans to end universal education for all which has existed for over 70 years.

Under the Tories the number of people on zero hour contracts has increased to nearly one million. These jobs give no security to employees and their families often leaving them at the mercy of unscrupulous employers. If re-elected the Tories will continue to destroy the rights which workers have painstakingly won over many years. House building has fallen to its lowest peacetime level since the 1920s. There are 200,000 fewer homeowners than 2010.

The Tory ideologically dislike public services because they believe that everything is run better in the private sector. They consistently undermine our public servants, whether they be nurses, teachers, local government workers, police, or member of the emergency services. They have capped public sector pay at a derisory 1% and yet they have no problem about hospitals buying in agency staff at much higher rates of pay.

Conservative Government under May would completely jeopardise both their domestic and international plans which have been in full effect since the Thatcher era.What has happened in Manchester and London is truly horrific and who’s responsible for it will probably remain unclear for many years to come.

One thing is for certain though, that this has come at an unbelievably ideal time for those in power and over the next five weeks the media will now be entirely focused on this terrorist attack and not the disastrous Conservative party campaign that was losing support daily. It will be entirely focused on using this attack as further proof of why we need a ‘strong and stable’ leader and not a man of peace with ‘terrorist links’. It will be focused on the need to get behind the party that will take the fight to the Islamic state and not the party who want to reduce military action in the Middle East. It will be used as proof of why we need to invest in nuclear weapons instead of social care.

Ultimately it will be used to further divide and conquer society and to try and stop the current progressive left uprising in its tracks. Don’t let this tragic loss of innocent life be used as a campaign tool for the people who inflict so much misery on the world. We need to double up our efforts and remind people of exactly why we need a government committed to equality and peace, not warmongering and western imperialism because the lives of people both here and overseas are depending on it more than ever. !

Are we beginning to see the first main signs of the Brexit recession? May likes us to assume there will rainbows everywhere and stardust will fall as rain by leaving the EU. Yet back in reality the economy is hardly ticking over, inflation is up and set to go higher! Peoples living standards are falling and wages for most are stagnate and below the rate of inflation. And when you take out the con of counting zero hour contracts as people in paid work unemployment is likely to be rising not falling.

May clearly is out of her depth with the EU negotiations, she stamped her feet and the EU just said, well you want to leave so its by our terms not yours. Of course May has no answer but to threaten to make us ridiculously poor and use World Trade Organisation rules. It’s a bit like saying if you do not give me all what I want, I will dump my car or van in the water, so there!

You can see the EU just yawning when they have to listen to Mays demands. And yet she makes out she needs a landslide to give her the ability to negotiate with the EU!!! Well Newsflash the EU have already said it makes not a jot of difference how many Tory MP’s there are when it comes to the negotiations!

Labour is now judged in two polls to be 5% and 8% behind respectively. That is an astonishing closing of the polling. Corbyn’s personal rating has improved significantly. All this is part of the mosaic of evidence that indicates Labour has conducted a far better campaign. Our policies are popular. The Tories’ are failed and uncosted. Everything they touch turns to dust. If Labour can deny May the landslide she craves we have done OK. If we stop her improving her number of seats, she is in trouble. If we deny her a majority, she is in crisis. That we are even talking about restricting her or even winning this election is evidence of a remarkable sea change. Nobody in the Labour Party should now be sowing disunity. We have a leader who is repairing our reputation after two demoralising election defeats and he is doing it on an inspirational and popular programme. This is an appeal, if you want to drive out this reactionary and weak government, join us out on the doorstep. When we talk face to face with the public we can correct the media lies. All out for the next two weeks. If you abstain, you will regret it.

The Tories are not being honest with people. Michael Portillo said David Cameron told him if people knew what he intended to do with the NHS he would not be elected because the British are wedded to the NHS. This is what David Cameron said in 2006.

“But when your family relies on the NHS all the time – day after day, night after night – you really know just how precious it is.  I know the problems. Turning up at A&E and the children’s one is closed. Waiting for the doctor when you’re desperate with worry. Waiting for the scan that is so desperately need. It can be incredibly frustrating. But more often than not, it is an inspiration – thanks to the people who work in the NHS. The nurses who do everything to make you comfortable. The doctors who desperately want to get to the truth. And the army of support staff who get forgotten so often but who make such a difference to all of us. For me, it’s not a question of saying the NHS is ‘safe in my hands’. My family is so often in the hands of the NHS. And I want them to be safe there.

Tony Blair once explained his priority in three words: education, education, education. I like to think I can do it in three letters. “NHS.” Who would have thought Tony Blair would use PFI on our the NHS to build more hospitals which was first used by a Conservative government to tender to the private contractors to rid the in house cleaning and catering services and then close Mental Health and Learning Disabilities Hospitals to sell off the lands to the highest bidders. Whilst those closures took place The then Conservatives introduced a bill Care into Community which opened the floodgate of increase demands in various communities which was not ready to accommodate the likes of support in the communities for mental health and learning disabilities.

It’s been alleged that this General Elections cost around £143 million an increase of 16% from £123 million it budgeted for the 2015 general elections. The price tag reflects the scale of operation to staff tens of thousands of polling stations, process millions of votes and distribution of candidates’ mailings. The EU Referendum was similar.

All the political parties uses the oldest trick in the world it’s more like a textbook example of this is, leaking documents to catch the attention of the press, social media, and bloggers to test the political climate then the party in concern will obviously will reply with textbook answers it’s like playing a game of(Chinese whispers). Voters are like marmite when it comes to voting patterns as they seek what political parties best represent them with their bread and butter issues and yes some may want jam or marmalade on their bread to etc.

Conservatives are famous for using the mantras that Labour is funded by the trade unions and Strong and Stable Leadership.

No doubt that Conservatives seem to forget that Labour born out of trade union movement which I’m proud to belong to a party for the many and not for the few. Labour believes by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we can achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many not the few where rights we enjoy reflect the duties we owe, and where we live together, freely, in a spirit of solidarity, tolerance and respect.

Can’t help but to have a little dig at the Conservatives they claim to be the party of working class, it’s more like the party for the fatcats. In a nutshell it’s who is best at producing the best spin and who can donate more to the Conservative coffers as they don’t really care about working class, small businesses, homelessness or public services. If Theresa May lost the elections this would pave the way for the kiss of death(Boris Johnson) in waiting to become the new leader of the Conservative Party.  We are living in intriguing times post Snap General Elections was announced this was to cause the maximum effect just so the Conservatives receive a majority to railroad through the so-called Brexit negotiations in parliament and with the EU leaders by saying the people have spoken with one voice in Britain and so stick that up your pipe and smoke it.

I make no apologies by saying this elections was unwanted, unnecessary and opportunistic. The government had a working majority and nearly all votes in the commons by more than 30. There is no appetite among the population for a third national poll in two years. They were given a mandate in the referendum in June and they should carry it out. At the end of the negotiations process the deal should be voted upon in parliament and then put to the people through a general election or referendum.

Theresa May’s cynical decision is an attempt to eliminate dissent and to gain a larger majority in order to please the hard-right Tory agenda of dismantling the NHS, breaking up state education and undermining and selling off public facilities, while at the same time giving more tax cuts to the richest people. If this happens then inequality will rise even more dramatically and more and more people will rightly say that system is rigged against them.

All the political parties will have beaten their war drums to get their activists out on the doorsteps to promote their political parties who their candidate(s) are best to represent your area and of course it’s up to the voters to decide whether they will put their x on the ballot-box. The battle-lines had been drawn between the three main political parties this reminds me of a Chinese drama entitled Three Kingdoms where three kingdoms are at war with each other (Labour, Conservatives, and Libdems) who will best kingdom to serve the nation and the only way they can win is by using the best spin and which political parties has the best manifesto. Sadly there is only one winner which maybe or not be your choice of party that you voted in.

If any political party members are honest with themselves they will receive some negative views from various voters which include non-voters on the doorsteps then something needs changing to win over voters.  Like I mentioned in my previous article https://gordonlyew.wordpress.com/2017/05/08/my-thoughts-on-local-and-metro-mayoral-election-results/ I’m not preaching to the converted why they should vote Labour it’s the unconverted and undecided which include nonvoters that we all need to convince to vote Labour. I’m not for one moment indicating that Labour policies were rubbish if anything it’s policies which many would concur.

If there were a roomful of undecided voters both Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn turns up into the room the undecided voters were put on the spot with a random question who do they feel safe to run the country and say if they all indicated  they will feel safe with Theresa May then there is cause for concern. In a nutshell it’s no good talking amongst ourselves and not listening to the voters as they will feel undervalued and less likely to return to Labour if we continue to ignoring them. That has now been eradicated. 

I’m very glad that the former Labour leader, Gordon Brown was incessantly vilified. His way of speaking was mocked. His efforts to offset the banking crisis created by casino style speculators in the city suddenly turned into blaming Labour for overspending on public services to create the deficit. Similarly, Ed Miliband was reviled as not being a ‘patriot’, for being unable to eat a bacon sandwich gracefully, for being too left-wing and lacking the qualities a ‘leader’ needs. The media had no interest in Labour’s policies. Now, in 2017, it is the same as it ever was. Unless Labour offers a right-wing, Tory agenda it will be constantly attacked as not fit to run the country. The ruling elite the establishment wants their Tory party in charge.

Gordon Brown is correct to say that Theresa May is “waging a war against the poor” and risks leaving the country more divided than at any time in 50 years. Poverty levels were set to eclipse those last seen in the early 1990s. “No Tory prime minister ever should be given a free hand”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39906815

I’m glad that Tom Watson has is sing the almost sing from the hymn book  in what I’ve been saying about a Maggie Thatcher Style majority by urged voters to back their local Labour MP in order to avoid Ice Queen Theresa May gaining a  landslide that would make it difficult to hold the Conservatives to account.  Labour’s deputy leader said the party had a “mountain to climb” over the four weeks until the general election and was lagging behind in the polls with all income groups, including working class voters.

See details below:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/12/tom-watson-labour-jeremy-corbyn-determined-to-stop-thatcher-style-tory-landslide

This to my followers who does not have clue who is Maggie Thatcher see enclosed bio:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher

Theresa May Uturn


Drums will be beating very hard from now to the 8 June as General Elections takes place as voters goes to the polling station until it close at 10pm. 

All the political parties will be stating their case to the nation why they should be voted into office. This will be one of the prediction I said three weeks before David Cameron resigned as Leader of Conservatives and Prime Minister that a snap General Elections will be called the moment that Brexit was announced David Cameron went to the nation. I was laughed at, now I’m having the last laugh and it’s very loud. Theresa May took over the leadership of the Conservatives and  became Prime Ministers. She does not have a mandate by the nation. I was not surprised by the decision by Theresa May to hold snap General Elections to give her a mandate.

It’s been reported that around 50,000 disabled people have had specially adopted cars taken away since changes to disability benefits in 2013. The mobility scheme entitles disabled people to lease a specialty adopted new car, scooter or powered wheelchairs using part of their benefit. It alleged by a charity that around 51,000 people have had their vehicles taken away since the benefits taken away were changed in 2013.

It is alleged that two private firms that access people with claiming disability benefits will receive nearly 200m more than officials had originally expected figures suggest. The government had estimated that Atos and Capita would earn £512m for Personal Independence Payments (PIPs) assessments between 2013/2017.

Who would believe that people with learning disabilities are missing out on vital health checks this includes blood pressure, cancer screening, and mental health assessments. Only about half of women with learning disabilities received breast cancer screening last year, compared with about 70% of eligible women overall.

Millions of students and former students in England and Wales will face a sharp increase in interest rates on tuition fees and maintenance loans. The interest rates are linked to inflation and are set to continue to rise by about a third from 4.6% to 6.1% this will be enforced in the autumn alongside an increase in tuition fees to £9,250 for universities in English.

It is purported that Housing problems in England are causing people to suffer anxiety, depression and panic attacks.

Of people who had experienced housing worries within the past five years, 69% said their mental health was affected, suggests research for the charity.

The researchers interviewed 1,050 people from across England who reported poor housing, rent problems or being threatened with eviction.

The polling company ComRes carried out online interviews for the report in February this year with a representative sample of 3,509 adults from across England.

Of these, about 30% or 1,050 people, said they had experienced housing problems within the last five years.

Among this group the most common mental health problems were:

  • stress – 64%
  • anxiety – 60%
  • sleep problems – 55%
  • depression – 48%
  • panic attacks – 30%

About one in 20 had visited their GP because of their mental state and a worrying minority had contemplated suicide.

Shelter says that if these figures were replicated across the whole of England’s population, one million people would have sought medical intervention because of mental health issues brought on by poor housing or worries about eviction or affording rent or mortgage payments over the past five years.

Additionally, one in six said housing worries had also affected their physical health, causing symptoms like hair loss, nausea, exhaustion, dizzy spells and headaches, while damp or mouldy homes can exacerbate respiratory conditions like asthma, says the charity. Telephone interviews with 20 inner-city GPs highlighted the extent to which housing has an impact on mental health.

Housing difficulties can be particularly harsh for people “on the line of coping or not coping. Then, they really do tip over the edge”, said one London GP.

A Sheffield GP said parents could become depressed because “they’re unable to provide a nice environment for their children”.

“In the children, they tend to get a little bit, sometimes withdrawn, sometimes a bit anxious and angry.”

London GP Andrew Carr said housing was a major contributing factor to mental illness.

“With evictions on the rise in my area, I’ve seen people with acute anxiety or severe stress because they’re facing the threat of losing their home.”

It is alleged that around four million homeowners in England do not own the freehold to property new government estimates have revealed.

The government promised action, saying it will end leaseholds for new housing developments.

Well there is saying which comes to mind ‘A promise is a comfort to a fool’. This is on the grounds of government makes all sorts of promises in order to gain your votes. In a nutshell they are all talk but no action.

To be frank I would rather believe the Labour Party Shadow Housing Minister John Healey position who said those leaseholders are currently ‘unprotected from rip off raises in ground rents from developers or management companies and under a Labour Government will end this sharp practice.

It is alleged that our dedicated nurses are being protected with affordable pay and their jobs. What a load of hogwash if this was the case why is the government are cutting funding to our NHS and it’s no wonder the Royal College of Nursing are assessing the mood for strike action in protest over pay. The union are asking 270,000 of its members across the U.K. whether they want to strike before deciding issuing a formal ballot on the grounds of pay freezes and caps on pay raise since 2010 have effectively led to a 14% pay cut due to the rising cost of living. This government just don’t get it, claiming that they are investing £1.4billon to ensure all children to get help they need. Children as young as four are suffering from mental health problems such as panic attacks, anxiety, and depression which is being reported by teachers. A survey done by the teaching union NASUWT suggest almost all of the 2,000 who responded say they had come into contact with mentally ill pupils. Members of the teaching union suggest schools are struggling to access enough support to deal with the issue.

When I look at all the u-turns that Theresa May has done such as:

  1. Not wanting to call a snap General Elections, she decided to call one.
  2. EU Citizens Right to remain during her leadership campaign she refuses to guarantee the right of EU nationals living in the UK, now she says they are allowed to stay.  
  3. Jeremy Hunt said that foreign doctors are not allowed to stay she refuse to say three times that they are allowed to stay.  
  4. Foreign Staff list purposed by Amber’s plan to force companies to publish how many foreign staff they employ has been kicked to the wilderness.  

For this reason the Conservatives with all the u turns its no wonder why they are in disarray and they cannot be trusted to run the nation. I would rather have a Labour Government and urge voters to create a political storm by voting Labour on 8 June.