There is little doubt in my mind, that the current “malaise” in UK politics represents a virtually unique opportunity for the Lib-Dems to clean up the mess that has polluted UK politics for some time now, particularly since David Cameron the architect of the Brexit catastrophe used a referendum to try and solve internal Tory party problems.
His resignation, possibly due to his awareness of the stupidity he had enacted, led to M Theresa May, famous for the original drivel of “Brexit Means Brexit” and herself initially at least a committed remainer, now arguing the will of the UK people must be respected.
But since when has a 52% vote in favour meant disregarding the votes of the remaining 48%..
There is nothing holy about a mass suicide, kamikaze movement that kills off opportunities for impoverished voters in the UK and countless unborn generations of children for decades. IMHO.
In fact, there are legal cases going on where Theresa May has publicly admitted that she knew very well that the referendum was based on falsehoods, distortions and the like. The first time the case was submitted, the judge ruled that it was “out of time”. However, an appeal was launched where the judge ruled case will be heard, and who knows what penalties will be imposed on a PM who has publicly admitted that the referendum was loaded, and unfair. A big red bus was all it took to deceive the UK electorate, which had developed the mindset that all that had gone wrong in the UK was due to the EU, in addition to incompetent BJ with the big mouth, former foreign minister who wisely resigned and continued operating behind the scenes. with Gove aiding and abetti8ng him until they had a fall-out.
We wil try to keep you abreast of these developments to see what we can do, with or without Sir Vince. But rest assured though, we have some high profile actions and issues we will be taking up and launching in the very, very near future in some unusual ways.
Click here to hear a short sample of Tobias’s magic! and relax Just 3mins 30 secs, but all available on Spotify!
We need your encouragement I believe with your support this could turn out to be a factor in briniging an end to Brexit. The last lap which we are now entering is the most important that “Great Britain” ( great is misnamed, as it also means notable,, and does not just refer to size) has ever faced in the whole of her hitherto colourful and magnificent past history. I used to have a certain pride in being English, but that has gone now into the gutter.
Please take this issue on board, like ti and circulate as widely as you can, it as it will make a profound difference.Otherwise I will eat my chocolate hat!
Brian Turner 74-year-old geriatric activist, fighting this during his retirement.
On Friday, October 13, 2017 Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, stated the following: “But if you allow Catalonia – and it is not up to us of course – to become independent, other people will do the same. I don’t like that. I don’t like to have a euro in 15 years that will be 100 different states. It is difficult enough with 17 states. With many more states it will be impossible,” The Guardian, 10/14/2017.
Yesterday gave us yet another unfortunate diabolical twist in the sorry saga that is brexit.
Lord Justice Hickenbottom refused leave to appeal a decision, made in the High Court, in the case brought by Sue Wilson and others against the Prime Minister.
The case argued in essence that the decision by the Prime Minister to trigger Article 50 was made, by her alone and was made based on the outcome of a referendum which was flawed by illegallity. The plaintiffs argued that:
Because of the illegal overspending by both main leave campaign groups the referendum was undemocratic and therefore illegal in common law.
The Prime Minister’s behaviour in triggering Article 50 based on the result of such a flawed vote and her continuing to follow a policy of leaving the EU in the full knowledge that the vote was illegal and undemocratic was neither reasonable nor rational. She has made public statements admitting this.
The case was initially dismissed by Mr Justice Ouseley on the grounds that it was “out of time”, effectively too much time had passed between the action being taken and the case being brought to court. This decisiion was described by Dr Robert C Palmer (a lecturer in law) as “brutal and absurd” because it appeared that legal technicalities were trumping democracy, legality and the spirit rather than the letter of the law.
In the hearing, Lord Justice Hickinbottom accepted that had the referendum been binding upon the executive then the proven law breaking by Vote Leave and Leave.EU would have meant that the referendum could, should and almost certainly would have been set aside. It was accepted that because the referendum was only ever advisory the court had no power to do that, but it was also accepted that May’s treatment of the result as though it was binding on her government gave an opportunity to argue that point. In the event what he was asked to do was to allow an appeal where, should the plaintiff be successful, the court would state that the referendum result was illegal and undemocratic. They would be asked to make a statement nothing more, what action the government took with regard to that statement would be a matter for them.
Leave to appeal was denied proiding a death blow to the rule of law for demoicracy in the UK
The decision to refuse the appeal has not yet been explained, and will not be until the judgement is given in writing at some future date although it is being assumed that once again the time limit will be given as the main factor behind the decision.
My concern is, that whatever reason is given in the written judgement, the real driving force behind the decision to refuse leave to appeal is quite simply that the brexit process is now so horribly toxic that the judiciary want no part of it.
None of them want to see another disgusting headline like the one published in the Daily Mail by it’s then editor Paul Dacre which described the judges in the Gina Millar case as “Enemies of the people” and certainly none of them feel inclined to be the subject of such a headline.
So that is where brexit has taken Britain, British society and the rule of law.
We have known for a long time now that the brexiter community are uninterested in facts or evidence, we have known that in order to get support for their case, all the leaders of brexit have to do is throw a nice juicy soundbite to their flock, throw in a line about blue passports or fish and bingo.
We have also known that a huge number of MPs are far more interested in their own careers, lifestyles and expense accounts than they are in their county or their constituents which is why Prime Minister May has been able to continue to cling on to power while lying to the country, holding parliament in contempt, and suffering huge and embarrassing losses in the house of commons, to say nothing of her record number of ministerial resignations.
What is now becoming apparent, and is far more worrying, is the seeming unwillingness of the courts and the judiciary to uphold common law and British democracy in the face of an aggressive, right-wing (mostly foreign-owned) press and in the face of an unthinking and unintelligent online mob, which can be whipped into a frenzy at the drop of a hat by the likes of Farage and Rees-Mogg, or even by proven halfwits like Andrew Bridgen (famed for his unforgettable views on obtaining an Irish passport) or Nadine Dorries who pleaded to be told what the customs union was because she kept losing arguments about why Britain should leave it (and no I’m not kidding!)
It has been clear for a very long time that brexit has split british society in a way which will take generations to repair. It becomes increasingly clear on a daily basis that any kind of brexit is going to be extremely economically damaging and that a no deal brexit would be catastrophic for Britain. Now it seems that the brexit rabble rousers inside and outside the house of commons have created a monster, a mob, that now even scares the judiciary and that does not bode well for a post brexit UK.
Peter Sutton Reading this article it is both good news and bad news.
Tobias Wallin’s – “Still in the Bank” helps witht the good feelings, and sth will happen!
The good news is that there may be another opportunity to get the illegal referendum result declared null and void on the grounds that it is wholly undemocratic.
Clearly if that happens it is a very short step for the court to declare that May’s decision to trigger article 50 on the basis of an illegal referendum result (which she has already admitted she did) was not reasonable and therefore article 50 must be withdrawn. RIP brexit.
The bad news however is that the judge in the original high court case was fully aware of all of this.
He knew May triggered article 50 based solely on the referendum result because that had been established in an earlier court case. He also knew that May was aware of the illegality when she triggered article 50 because she admitted as much (through her counsel) in his court. She said:
How difficult will it be to establish new trade with non-EU countries after a hard Brexit?
If you think that there is an easy solution with a ‘No Deal’ Brexit, and that as Jacob Rees Mogg and others have claimed, that it is only a question of some new trade deals to replace what we lose with the EU, then please read this article.
It makes it abundantly clear that trade with other world economic powers will go nowhere near replacing what we stand to lose with the EU and that the impacts on the British economy will be enormous.
The UK’s trade with the EU and the other countries with which the EU has trade agreements and which will be lost to the UK post Brexit, is so large (69%) that the UK will find it very difficult to find new trade deals to compensate for the fall in EU-related trade that results from Brexit.
It will be particularly difficult to compensate for any lost trade in intermediate goods with the EU. It will also be difficult to land any new trade deals with other countries quickly, except perhaps the rolling over of existing EU trade agreements with smaller countries.
To illustrate the scale of the trade challenge facing the UK, only 7% of UK exports go to the BRICS (Brazil, India, Russia and China) while 44% go to the EU. This means that a modest 5% drop in trade with the EU as a result of Brexit would require a 31% increase in trade with the BRICS, just to stand still.
It is not just a matter of arithmetic. It is a lot easier for the UK to trade with neighbouring European countries than other countries. Distance is the biggest and most obvious barrier to trade but it is not the only barrier. For example, in developing (and some developed) countries, there are often bureaucratic or political hurdles to overcome, which can include onerous customs requirements, cultural differences, language barriers, legal uncertainty and discriminatory tax. In some countries, negotiation of trade deals may involve risks of bribery and corruption. It can also be a challenge just to get paid on time: credit risk is often higher.
It is also a question of the UK’s relative competitive strength in trade. Those markets which are attractive to the UK are likely to be attractive to other countries and trading blocs. China and India are attractive because of their scale, but the UK has been losing market share in India to Germany and France; in China, Germany does 4 to 5 times more trade than the UK. Similarly, the UK’s stated target countries may find other partners more attractive. For example, Australia has demonstrated that its first priority in Europe is a trade deal with the EU27 trading bloc.
The attractiveness of overseas markets to the UK depends on a combination of factors including size of trade, proximity and comparability of legal system, language, culture and, of course, historic ties. Taking these factors into account, the FT analysed future market potential for 2050 using detailed trade analysis from a specialist trade consultancy, Ciuriak Consulting, and long-term economic forecasts from PwC. The FT concluded:
The EU27, US, China, India and Canada are the most attractive markets for the UK today and remain so in 2050.
The top five risers, which are expected to be more attractive in 2050, are Russia, Nigeria, Turkey, Pakistan and Malaysia.
The top five fallers, which are expected to be less attractive in 2050, are Saudi Arabia, Japan, Australia, Brazil and South Korea.
The government’s own impact assessment says that the economic impact of UK trade deals with other countries would be SMALL compared to the benefits of EU membership. A trade deal with the US would only benefit GDP by about 0.2% in the long term. Trade deals with other non-EU countries and blocs, such as China, India, Australia, the Gulf states and Southeast Asia would add, in total, a further 0.1- 0.4% to GDP.
The US is the UK’s main trading partner outside the EU, however a trade deal with the US seems very unlikely. In May 2018, an authoritative study published in association with Harvard Business School explained why in careful detail. The study concludes:
“We discuss the key potential upsides, possible risks and principal negotiating issues from both US and UK perspectives. We conclude that it is highly unlikely that a free trade deal between the US and the UK will be secured in the near term and that the likely potential benefits for British businesses are less than often suggested.”
Source: FT, The post-Brexit trade deals that Britain needs to prioritise, 3 January 2018
Ciuriak, Dan and Siauw-Soegiarto, Fanny and Sun, Sharon Zhengyang, Quantifying the UK’s Post-Brexit Export Potential: A Gravity Model Analysis (April 22, 2017). Available at SSRN.
PwC, The World in 2050, February 2017
EU Exit Analysis, Cross-Whitehall Briefing, January 2018 (published March 2018)
On the Rebound: Prospects for a US-UK Free Trade Agreement, Peter Sands, Ed Balls, Mehek Sethi, Eleanor Hallam, Sebastian Leape, Nyasha Weinberg, May 2018
Life has been pretty tough for me just as for maybe many other persons in the last 3 to 4 months.
My own fault and with no sense of pride, just shame I think my achievements could well go into the Guinness Book of Records.
I will document the process later with the strategic details, so maybe others can avoid committing the stupidities I managed with great blindness and little skill. If I could kick myself I would have done so a long time ago. But try it, it ain’t easy.
Suffice it to say through extreme gullibility on my part towards a door-to-door salesman of the very worst kind, I ended up with 2 duplicate suppliers of broadband plus TV, and also a direct subscription to a TV company called CMore, and the killer was all of these were for a “bindningsperiod of 2 years”, so extremely depressing as I had been hoping retirement would allow me to be lazy and enjoy life. But that was not to be! And it has stolen time from my preferred mission of fighting Brexit.
SOME WONDERFUL NEWS – OFF-TOPIC – ABOUT BREXIT
On that score I have every reason to believe there will be a magnificent speech from the Leader of the Lib-Dems, Sir Vance Cable. But am not at liberty to disclose anything as yet.
Some of the TV content from the broadband suppliers was also duplicated in the TV supplied from CMore.
How this happened I will document on a future occasion.
But now I am beginning to see light at the end of the tunnel and can say I have been able to solve with some luck and the generosity of one of the broadband suppliers about 65% of the problems. Not home and dry yet but working hard on it.
Quite magnificent of them, have you ever heard of a supplier in the IT business in Sweden, saying OK we understand what has happened and are prepared to cancel our agreement with you at zero cost. People told me this is not possible, too much money at stake.
But the truth is it did happen. And later when I feel more in balance, I will reveal this, but am curious to get an understanding of who regular broadband and FB users in Sweden think which of the current major IT broadband and TV suppliers really care about their customers and would be capable of such a magnificent gesture and cancel a 2 year agreement and do what is obviously right for their customers.
Hopefully, something good could come out of this as a mini-survey on how we perceive the praxis of IT broadband and TV suppliers.
And finally, does anyone know if it is correct that as consumers we have the legal right to get a copy of the customer log a company has on us. I have not yet been able to identify this, any guidance would be much appreciated.
I have asked Cmore both in writing and over the phone for this, left messages for the so-called head of communications JG at Cmore, (who does not appear to be capable of communication, maybe I am being unfair as silence is a means of communication, isn’t it) to get in touch with me regarding the customer log, as well as another unnamed individual Johan D (people don’t have names in this country) who is connected with something called “kvalitetsutveckling” and despite explicitly stating in writing he would get in touch about 2 weeks ago has failed to do so. I believe they are just trying to tire me out. They won’t succeed.
The quickest way to learn new knowledge is via human contacts. More diverse contacts automatically means more knowledge. But are they uneducated? If so, it does not mean they have no knowledge. The wonder of Sweden a country that did not participate in the two world wars, is according to some largely due to immigration, and emigration that occurred in relation to the wars. The active, daring people, lacking means, but having bravery and will in abundance helped to get Sweden going and prospering.
The same is happening today. Yes, the Swedish bureaucracy creates a lot of false hurdles and is ridiculously inefficient in terms of helping new arrivals start bguilding their lives. It can take two years or more. In some cases even longer. Uncertainty over being able to stay or not diminishes willingness to work and take advantage of new opportunities. Immigrants who have lived through hardship do not shy away from heavy work. Yes, you always find a rotten egg in a big enough basket, but the majority are fresh and willing.
And then there is religion. Islam. Gee, it creates just another way to enable misunderstandings. But all religions are based on humans and human beliefs. There does not exist a human religion today where there are no skeletons in the closets. Catholic pedophiles, crusades, burning of witches, etc. The important point is communication and tolerance.
The less tolerance, the more problems we will end up with! Why? Because we limit ourselves as human beings and thereby shorten the impact our lives can create!
So how does this relate to the Swedish election and the various parties? Some argue that only one party limits choice – the Sweden Democrats. In what respect? They are AGAINST abortion. They are AGAINST cooperation through the EU. They are AGAINST immigration. They are AGAINST other religions on the same terms as the indigenous Swedish religion.
I would advise those that love such views to lock themselves in their house and avoid human contact. Eventually I am sure even a scary Islamic Imam would become a welcome distraction!
But it is not just the ideas that the Sweden Democrats support that are worrying. The even more worrying part is their friends. Around the whole of Europe and the World various nationalist parties have been busy established themselves attracting “simple souls”. Yes, simple souls where easy solutions like blaming certain ethnic groups and “immigrants” satisfy those not able to reason in more global, tolerant and open.-minded ways.
Unfortunately, Trump and USA have become the leader in this simplified worldview benefiting more authoritarian regimes like China and Russia. Specifically, Russia who enabled Trump’s election victory have calculated that their influence will grow to the extent that the USA refrains from or reduces its open-minded participation in global affairs.
Climate change, global trade, UN, NATO, the Internet are all issues that are not possible to solve based solely on closed national interests only. And solutions are increasingly urgently necessary. An open mind and willingness to accept the views of others is a prerequisite to solutions anywhere. And this willingness starts with votes. Your vote.
Don’t trust everything you hear and read. Check sources and THINK YOURSELF! Is immigration really bad? Avoidable? Why not embrace change?
On Sept 9th/10th we will know the results of the election from abroad, and it is likely to be very close. Will there be a “kingmaker”, the SD? That could be difficult as all other parties have stated they will not co-operate with SD. Uncertain times lie ahead.
One interesting outcome might be how the left and right coalitions respond if they backtrack on their commitment not to even discuss with the Sweden Democrats. This would require some agile u-turns and clever “fudges”.
A trade-off between getting power and fulfilling their stated commitments. Difficult choice for politicians. It took Germany about 8 months to solve her problem.