Indeed food for thought for there are many similarities, but hopefully with the 1930’s in our thoughts we will eventually rally and come though largely unscathed, but worry at what might been.
I wish Julia well where ever she resides and a good life.
My parents’ homeland has dealt with its Nazi past. After the Brexit vote, I want to embrace my continental European origins
The battered pound has notched up its best two-week performance in eight years after the surprise US election result took investor focus off the UK’s Brexit challenges.
Market concerns shifted to the euro amid fears that Donald Trump’s victory will trigger a wave of populism and political uncertainty throughout Europe.
Measured against other currencies, sterling enjoyed its best fortnight since 2008. It remains well below pre-referendum levels, but on Friday managed to push above $1.26 for the first time since early October. That will soothe concerns over a weak currency pushing up import costs and stoking inflation.
While the pound rebounded, the FTSE 100 share index fell by more than 1% for the second day running, erasing all the gains made on the day of Trump’s win.
That capped a tumultuous week for financial markets as investors proffered diverging views over what a Trump presidency would mean for US growth, global trade and individual shares. Debate raged over whether a big spender in the White House would boost economic activity and inflation in the world’s leading economy or whether his anti-trade stance would curb growth around the globe.
Government lawyers are exploring the possibility of arguing in the supreme court that the article 50 process could be reversed by parliament at any time before the UK completes its exit from the European Union.
Prominent academic experts have told the Guardian they know the government’s legal team has sounded out lawyers about the potential change of tack, which some argue would lead to a victory in the case brought by Gina Miller and other campaigners.
Prof Takis Tridimas, an expert in EU law at King’s College London, said: “I know that the issue of revocation is a live issue in terms of the supreme court hearing.” He had heard that the government had commissioned research on the subject, he said.
Judges interpret the law as they see it and do not need to follow public opinion.
However, it is my view that MPs are the voice of the people as they are elected by a majority of those that could be bothered to vote, as to those that did not vote, who knows what therir opinion be. A referendum is a means of indicating the voice of the people and again those that did not vote, who knows what their views be. So MPs should follow the voice of their own electorate.
If they decide not to how can we respect the results of a General Election or a By Election, for they again are the voice of the opinion of the public. However, with regards to a General Election there are no MPs who can respect the vote or not, as Parliament is not in force during the election process and all persons standing for election are purely candidates.
If this ruling means that a referendum result is not binding, how is it that with regards to the Scottish Independence Referendum, which did not go as expected for the SNP and the Scottish parliament, does this mean the SNP majority could have disregarded the Scottish result and therefore they could have proceeded with the indpendence of Scotland from the UK.
other major rights merely “glossed over” by the government’s arguments. I don’t see
Certainly something needs to be done, for there should be zero tolerance on all forms of Hate Crime. The media can play their part to diminish this and to try to change peoples attitudes. However, the Government also has a role to play and they themselves should show in their comments, actions and legislature that Hate Crime will not be tolerated. A first would be to set out their views on record on how non-UK residents will be treated post Brexit and not leave it to the racists to decide.