Tag Archives: Secretary of State for Work and Pensions

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.

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.

 

Public Services workers deserves better pay which side are you on


Here is all us should not forget, the next time MPs and Councillors ask for your vote ask them which they voted on Public Services pay

London Mayor was right to call on Theresa May to appoint commissioners to run Kensington and Chelsea Council after its leader resigned over the Grenfell Tower fire as public trust could not be restored by other members of the council, residents quite rightly felt desperately neglected and wanted action. It is understood that Kensington and Chelsea have chosen a new council leader. Nicholas Paget Brown will continue to be in place until 19 July when Elizabeth Campbell takes over as new leader.
I’m glad that Justice Minister David Lidington has complete confidence of Sir Martin Moore-Bick(Grenfell Tower Public inquiry chairman) is prepared to be very broad when investigating the causes of the fire. He will be looking at the construction which dates back to the 1970s when the tower was built to examine warnings that may have been missed. It’s a pity that the inquiry will not include the social issues in Kensington and Chelsea. However, I have more confidence in Emma Dent Caod Labour Member Of Parliament said that Sir Martin Moore – Brick was a “Technocrat who lacked credibility and the victim lawyers representing some of the families called for him to quit.
It transpires the government has ordered a taskforce to take over parts of Kensington and Chelsea Council in the aftermath of the Grenfell Tower fire. The council has been heavily criticised for its handling of the disaster on 14 June that killed around 80 people and still counting.
Weak and wobbly Maybot promises housing would be offered by Wednesday 5 July 2017 to those by offering temporary accommodation but only nine have so far been accepted and many are still in hostels. The Grenfell Response Team allegedly claimed 139 formal offers have been made. But North Kensington Law Centre which represents many victims, said some had been offered homes in other towers, other areas, or without enough rooms.

English Local Authorities a £5.8bn funding gap by 2020 without new sources of revenue, council leaders are warning. Services are running on a shoestring and councils must be at the front of the queue for extra cash. Lord Porter(LGA) argue they must be free to raise more council tax and keep all businesses rate income.
Headteachers in England are calling on MPs for answers on school funding shortage saying that they are still no closer to knowing their budgets. About 4,000 heads across 17 councils, mostly in southern England wrote to their member of parliament warning that schools face job loses and cuts to subjects. They say that the current levels of school funding is unsustainable.
Here is another U-Turn from the Conservatives manifesto scrap free school meals Nick Gibb(School Minister) is now saying the government would retain the existing provision having listened very carefully to the views of parents checkout Conservatives manifesto on Restricting free lunches to infants from poorer homes with free breakfast for all primary school pupils funded instead
It was alleged to save £650M a year but was left out of the queens speech
What a joker the chancellor of the exchequer has become insisting that the pay policy has not changed and the right balance must continue to be struck in terms of what is fair for workers and taxpayers and he understood people were weary after seven years of austerity. He rejects calls to take the foot off the pedal. Government must hold its nerves in the face of calls for a different path of higher taxes and borrowing.
Notice how David Cameron joined the debate in defence of Maybot by stating opponents of fiscal discipline are selfish not compassionate. Those who believed in sound finances were wrongly painted as uncaring. The exact reverse is true giving up sound finances isn’t being generous. He was the former Prime Minister who introduced the pay cap for public sector.
Demonstrators marched against the UK government’s economic policies which started from BBC Broadcasting House to Parliament Square. All of a sudden senior ministers are calling to lift the 1% pay cap, but don’t hold your breath can’t see it happening at the present time as the chancellor of the exchequer is saying on yer bike and wait to the autumn budget. It’s no wonder why public service workers feels undervalued and leaving the services to either set up their own consultancy or work abroad to put food on the table.
All well and dandy, you may think what about those who has not seen an increase on state benefits in line with inflation as food prices, children uniform, and cost of living increases. Some people may think those people on state benefits receive enough already. The truth is those who pass judgement don’t know the full facts as to why they are on benefits as each case should be judged on its merits as one side does not fit all. There is a job shortage in the country to employ skilled workers and unskilled workers and the situation will get worse before it gets better. Instead successful Governments are happy to bash the unemployed to gain votes as this seen as vote winners.
Nasty Party has admitted that they have to change hard to win over young power who voted Labour in June’s General Elections. Damian Green is on a mission to tell his party after losing their majority to form a government.
It’s been alleged by John Chapman(former chief of staff) Maybot had implemented “red lines” in Brexit talks and has hamstrung David Davis on European Court of Justice and among other things. It is further alleged that Theresa May would not get a Brexit deal through Parliament unless she showed more flexibility. This sounds like a warning to David Davis if you want my job as leader of Conservative Party I’m ensuring that I will give you a very hard time and ware you down to keep my job. Therefore taking all into account I feel that public service workers deserve more than 1% pay rise

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

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

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