This is not good news for the disabled and others on low incomes and just proves that you can not trust this Government. On coming into office as Prime Minister Theresa May promised that she would ‘place fairness and social justice at the heart of her premiership’. This we now see was an empty promise and further reduces the trust we all have with regards to our politicians.
At a time when Brexit is a major Government priority, social justice should be, at least, an equal footing.
It now appears that the plight of the disabled and others on low incomes will be made even worse than it is now. We have already seen the punitive cuts to welfare benefits and the assessment processes that are ‘not fit for purpose’.
At a time when our trust in politicians and this Government ,in particular, is extremely low, it is now to be reduced even further.
Does this Government really wish to remove disability and others on low incomes by causing their extinction, by creating conditions that will cause situations where their life survival cannot be maintained. Thus removing many from the welfare system, not by improving their quality of life, but by ending their life.
Source: Theresa May faces new crisis after mass walkout over social policy
The EU and Britain are like a couple who’ve been on a few dates. It’s too soon to go further but they’ll get there eventually, says director of Open Europe Henry Newman
Source: Ignore the naysayers. The Brexit negotiations are going better than EU leaders can let on | Henry Newman | Opinion | The Guardian
Philip Hammond backtracks after calling EU the enemy, but Brussels is clear Britain must make a better offer before talks can move on
Source: Brexit war of words heats up as ‘enemy’ EU tells Britain to pay up | Politics | The Guardian
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.
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.
Source: Article 50 could be reversed, government may argue in Brexit case | Politics | The Guardian
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
Source: Will the article 50 ruling stop Brexit? | The panel | Opinion | The Guardian