Brexit: Petition to remain in the EU hits one million signatures in just one day | Euronews


The response of Chris Sterry to this Euronews article

So, a Petition has received more than 1 Million signatures, but the 2016 Referendum received more than 17 Million votes. The 17 million were accused of not knowing what they were doing because the information that was produced in support of leaving, was, we are told not completely correct. But neither was the information supporting remain.

It is assumed by persons wishing to remain that if we stay in the EU, that the EU will continue as it is, but what about the threat to proceed to further political union, what will this entail, have we been informed. Will we be in control of our military forces, will we still be able to decide on our own legislation, will taxes and other forms of obtaining finance still be within our control. Will we still have an independent Government, or will it be so depleted to be as Local Government is today.

These are major issues, which currently we have not received any information on, so voting to stay is as much in the dark as voting to leave. I voted in the 1975 referendum and voted to stay within the EEC, now transformed to the EU. Did I vote for the EU, no I did not and nobody did. We could have voted on these issues, but, one, Tony Blair and other Prime Ministers did not allow a public vote. We are now told because of the lies and misinformation we should have a peoples vote, as though the vote in 2016 was not a peoples vote, so what did vote in 2016, were they not people?

We are told there are now people who were too young to vote in 2016, so they should now be allowed to express their vote but was this not the case in 1975. In 1975 there were also lies and untruths, for were we told of the wish or desire to proceed with Political Union, which we are now advised was known in 1975. I voted to stay in the EEC, but not the EU, I and many others have been denied that right since 1975.

All that is being said about the wrongs in 2016 could also be said of the 1975. But there is a major difference, in 1975 the vote was to stay, was this what the Establishment wished for, but in 2016 we voted to leave and that appears to be not what the Establishment wished for. Sour grapes by the losers in 2016, but not the losers in 1975. As 1975 was allowed to stand, so should 2016, whether it be right or wrong, just as in 1975. To say otherwise means that the democratic principles are not being adhered to and that means why should anyone really vote again, as it appears no matter what the result the Establishment will do as they please, is that not the ideals of a dictatorship?

 

Source: Brexit: Petition to remain in the EU hits one million signatures in just one day | Euronews

Theresa May admits country is ‘in crisis’


Yes, it is a crisis, but a crisis of many, health and then Social Care are two others and neither are being dealt with effectively, especially that within Social Care.

With this in mind I have a Petition – Pay all employed carers the Living Wage, which would go some way to reverse the crisis in Social Care and thereby not extending and increasing the crisis within health.

Please therefore see the following

You may be aware that there is a crisis within Social Care, an even greater crisis than that within health. This because a crisis in Social Care will have a great impact on health making the health crisis even greater.

Please could you consider supporting the Petition – Pay all employed carers the Living Wage. Petition link https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/236151

I am involved in a Petition project based on the Care Workers within the Care Industry.

This industry is in crisis, as is the Health Service, but within Social Care this crisis is even greater. This in turn will create even more pressure on all aspects of the Health Service. Therefore, action is needed to minimise the Social Care crisis and pay paid carers a reasonable wage is one of these actions, so there is now a petition.

Please, therefore, could you support the Petition – Pay all employed carers the Living Wage Flash, (Families Lobbying & Advising Sheffield), a group of family carers of relatives with Learning Disabilities and/or Autism in Sheffield are concerned at the state of Social Care, not only in Sheffield, but throughout the UK.

We all know that there is a major crisis in Social Care not just in Sheffield, but all over the UK. This is in a large part due to the lack of persons willing to come into the Care Industry, of which the low pay is a prime factor.

Parliament are aware and have formed a Cross Party Committee to look at funding, recruitment and pay for Care Workers in the Care Industry.

The Government currently have a recruitment campaign for the Care Industry ‘Every Day is Different’ https://carervoice.wordpress.com/2019/02/22/new-campaign-to-recruit-thousands-more-adult-social-care-staff-gov-uk/comment-page-1/#comment-57 .

However, there is no mention of pay.

Please therefore, could you consider the following #pay #employed #wage#funding #government#serviceproviders #living

Could you look at promoting the Petition – ‘Pay all employed carers the Living Wage, created by FLASh (Families Lobbying & Advising Sheffield).

Petition link https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/236151

Please sign this Petition, however, until you then click the signature verification link in the resulting email your signature will not be valid and will therefore not count re supporting the Petition cause.

More information https://1drv.ms/w/s!Aq2MsYduiazglWxA60JAY_2cpvN8

We need this Tory Government to end Austerity Cuts to Local Authorities and then increase the Grants to these Authorities so they can fund Care Service Providers to be able to pay their care workers at least the Living Wage.

Please also see the HFT report ‘Sector Pulse Check’, https://1drv.ms/w/s!Aq2MsYduiazglXuM7Duz6HOYXvsv

The care sector needs to recruit 128,000 new workers each year to replace those who retire or leave, new research has found.

The study (http://careassociationalliance.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Care-Association-Alliance-Social-care-Workforce-Analysis-2018.pdf) by the Care Association Alliance and law firm Royds Withy King found that one in three workers leave the sector every year – the highest turnover rate of all job sectors in the UK.

If the Petition attains 10,000 signatures, the Government will respond and if 100,000 signatures, it will be considered for debate in Parliament.

Please support and share with your work colleagues, family & friends, Social Media, MP and Local Councillors.

For any further information Chris can be contacted on carervoice@gmail.com

Thank of you

Chris Sterry
Vice-chair of FLASh

We must ‘hold our nerve’ on Brexit, May to tell MPs : Reuters


The United Kingdom is on course to leave the European Union on March 29 without a deal unless May can convince the bloc to amend the divorce deal she agreed in November and then sell it to sceptical British lawmakers.

“The talks are at a crucial stage,” May will tell parliament’s House of Commons on Tuesday, according to remarks supplied by her Downing Street office. “We now all need to hold our nerve to get the changes this House has required and deliver Brexit on time.”

British lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected May’s withdrawal deal last month, with the major sticking point being the Irish ‘backstop’ – an insurance policy to prevent the return of a hard border between the British province of Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic.

Critics say the policy could leave Britain subject to EU rules for years or even indefinitely after leaving the bloc.

The EU says the backstop is vital to avoiding the return of border controls in Ireland and has refused to reopen the Brexit divorce deal, though May insists she can get legally binding changes to replace the most contentious parts of the backstop.

“By getting the changes we need to the backstop; by protecting and enhancing workers’ rights and environmental protections; and by enhancing the role of parliament in the next phase of negotiations I believe we can reach a deal that this House can support,” May will say.

European Union Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said on Monday the bloc would agree to tweak the political declaration on EU-UK ties after Brexit that forms part of the package, to reflect a plan for a closer future relationship that could obviate the need for the contentious backstop.

“It’s clear from our side that we are not going to reopen the withdrawal agreement but we will continue our discussion in the coming days,” Barnier said.

The leader of the House of Commons, Andrea Leadsom, said lawmakers would back May’s deal if there were assurances the backstop was time-limited or the United Kingdom was allowed to leave it unilaterally, suggesting the deal itself did not need to be renegotiated.

Slideshow (6 Images)

 

Source: We must ‘hold our nerve’ on Brexit, May to tell MPs : Reuters

‘It was RIGGED for Remain!’ Brexiteer makes BRILLIANT point to silence complaints


Exactly.

Also we are told we should respect Democracy, so there was a Referendum in 2016 where the turnout was above 70% way above the general 60% or even lower percentages and these other elections are respected and the result not queried.

The electors were lied to, Yes but by both sides. If one side lied more than the other does this make the lying by the lower party any more believable than the majority party. In fact, the Electorate are lied to at all elections by all Parties. In fact the electorate are lied to by Politicians every day.

The result was a win for leave , yes, by a small amount, but some General Elections have been won by even smaller amounts and they were not queried and a rerun requested.

As it was a leave win and MPs say they are there for their electors, why is there a majority of MPs on the side of remain. Is it that they really do not respect the wishes of their electorate, but follow their own opinions, even when this is the opposite of that of their electors, is that respecting Democracy.

If we do not leave the EU then Democracy within the UK is Dead.

Yes, it may be the wrong decision, but so may be the election of particular Parties in a General Election, but we do not have the losing side demanding a rerun.

If we remain in the EU this just proves that some, may be all, MPS are in it for themselves and they do not care or respect the views of the electorate.

ukgovernmentwatch

Brexiteer Tim Montgomerie V Remainer Amrou Al-Kadhi

During BBC’s Politics Live BrexiteerTim Montgomerie claimed if the referendum hadbeen rigged it would have been in favour of Remain, not Leave.  He said the massive spending by the government on the Remain campaign supported this.

Politics Live panel guest Remainer Amrou Al-Kadhi brought attention to the fact that Jeremy Corbyn has been reluctant to support a second referendum or a Remain campaign.

Mr Kadhi called on the Labour leader to rally his party because more MP’s are more Remain than leave.  BBC presenter Jo Coburn asked the political commentator Mr Montgomerie how he felt on the claims that the 2016 referendum was moot because people were lied to.

Mr Montgomerie responded:

  • “I think if we cancelled elections or referenda in which politicians hadn’t told the whole truth, I’m not sure we would have any government or referendum outcome ever…

View original post 551 more words

Democracy and the ‘Voice of the People’.


Democracy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Jump to navigationJump to search

democracy means rule by the people.[1] The name is used for different forms of government, where the people can take part in the decisions that affect the way their community is run. In modern times, there are different ways this can be done:

  1. The people meet to decide about new laws, and changes to existing ones. This is usually called direct democracy.
  2. The people elect their leaders. These leaders take this decision about laws. This is commonly called representative democracy. The process of choosing is called election.[2] Elections are either held periodically, or when an officeholder dies.
  3. Sometimes people can propose new laws or changes to existing laws. Usually, this is done using a referendum, which needs a certain number of supporters.
  4. The people who make the decisions are chosen more or less at random. This is common, for example when choosing a jury for a trial. This method is known as sortition or allotment. In a trial, the jury will have to decide the question whether the person is guilty or not. In Europe, trials with a jury are only used for serious crimes, such as murderhostage taking or arson.

To become a stable democracy, a state usually undergoes a process of democratic consolidation.

The above is a definition of Democracy, but there are many others.

My own view is Democracy is the free voting by the population of a country to elect members to enact the views of the population.

Mainly this is done by a General Election here the population elect members (MPs or Members of Parliament) to represent them in a collective body, in the UK this is in Westminster, the House of Commons. Each candidate in each constituency issue their own Manifesto or is it the manifesto of their party. Ideally the voters in each constituency vote for their representative from the information contained in the such Manifesto. But in reality do they for each household my not receive details of each prospective parliament candidates manifesto and in many instances not even their name. When they vote on Poling Day the voting paper contains the name of each person up for election and also the Party they represent. So are the electorate voting for a named person, a named party, or both. Well who knows for this information is not available.

Then in the Manifesto there are so many areas contain within it. The voter my believe in all of the stated areas, but in reflection do they for who collects this information. However, the winning candidate in each constituency is them the MP for that constituency and when all results or in the Party who has the most elected MPs is requested to form a Government, if they can or a coalition of other parties or party. When this process is concluded are there any rules that the winning party progress through their 5 years on the basis of the manifesto, short answer is no, but it is assumed that they will and if they do not there is an opportunity at the end of 5 years to vote them back in or not.

During the course of the Parliament there my be occasions to call a Referendum on a stated subject with various options available from 2 or more.

One such referendum was the 2016 United Kingdom European Union membership referendum and this should have been a simple process for there was only 2 options to leave the EU or to remain. Facts were produced by all the various parties on either remaining or leaving, but were the fact mentioned correct. No they were not in many instances from both sides remain or leave.

The result was 52% to 48% to leave the EU, so this should have been cut and dried that all persons involved should have been working together to obtain the best possible result to leave. But remain did not honour that result and started an all out campaign to reverse the result.

The result was, in no question, a result to leave based on the percentage of those that were prepared to vote and the turnout was 72.21%, way above the usual percentage turnout for a General Election being

‘In 2001, turnout fell to 59.4%, its lowest level since 1918 and down 12% points compared with 1997. Although turnout rose again in 2005-2010, it was still below its 1997 level. In 2017 UK turnout was 66.8%, and turnout in each of the countries of the UK was below the 1918-2017 average for the UK, which was 72.9%.’ according to Turnout at electionsContains public sector information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0.

Based on that information the elected representatives should have supported the leave vote as it was a turnout large than any General Election, certainly since 2001 and the results of General Election are not normally questioned.

This brings into question do elected representatives, MPs have to follow the views of their electorate, or can they do as they please, surely with such a turnout and a result not based on party allegiance, they should have abided by the result.

During our negotiations with the EU there should have been no question to query that the UK was going to leave the EU, but with the strong demand by persons not respecting the result, did they believe such or was there a strong feeling that the remainers would succeed in overturning the 2016 result.

Many points have been raised to invalidate the result, the people did not understand what they were voting for, leave lied during their campaign, the views of the younger generation (those under 18 years of age at the time of the Referendum) were not represented, leave voters had now changed their minds and therefore there should be another’s Peoples Vote. The later, in fact, implying that the 2016 Referendum was not a people’s vote.

All of the above could be said of General Elections, but there is never such a campaign to overthrow General Election results.

However, with the winning margin being so small, although there have been winning margins as small, if not smaller in General Election, it could be said that the winning vote may not have been definitive, as the remainers do claim, but if they are correct then the results of General Elections should also be declared invalid.

Labour are now campaigning as are many remainers for a’People’s Vote. but should they not be saying another ‘People’s Vote’ for are not all votes a ‘People’s Vote’, for if they are not, who then is voting, are they not people?

These are purely ‘sound bites’ to emphasise their cause, for they do not want a people’s vote, but a vote that they agree with, a vote to remain in the EU.

However, as I have already said, the People’s Vote. on this question has already been done, the 2016 Referendum. If it is deemed that another referendum is required, which I do not agree with, then the only questions to vote on should be on how we leave the EU, of which, ‘No Deal has to be one option and in effect the nearest option to the 2016 referendum, which stipulated that a vote to leave would mean ‘No Customs Union’ and ‘No Single Market’.

As the elected representatives, MPs, are to some extent not proceeding on how their constituents voted in 2016, in which case any constituency that voted to leave, then their MPs should be conducting themselves likewise and then the same for MPs of constituencies that voted to remain.

Do we need a revision of the voting system?

Whereby in every aspect the MP of any constituency has to vote in accordance with the majority of all of their constituents, whether they voted for the MP or not, for a MP is the representative for all the constituents, not just those that voted from them.

It also beggars the question, that in General Elections can both the Party and the Candidate be mentioned on the ballot paper. surely it should be only one and then the people would be clear who or what they are voting for, either a Party or a Person, for you can not have both.

Should it be a Party then the MPs always for as the Party wishes irrespective of what their constituents wish, or if a named MP, then the MP should always vote how their constituents wish irrespective of how their Party wishes.

No matter what our current system of voting and the conduct of elected representatives is a shambles and drastic changes are in need of being required.

 

Voters less likely to back Labour with ‘stop Brexit’ policy, leaked poll suggests | Politics | The Guardian


A leaked poll commissioned by the pro-EU Best for Britain campaign suggests that voters would be less likely to back Labour if the party was committed to stopping Brexit.

According to the poll, passed to the Guardian, almost a third of respondents said they would be less likely to vote Labour, a similar number to those who said it would not make a difference. Twenty-five per cent said it would make them more likely to back Labour, with the rest saying they did not know.

The campaign group, which is pushing for a second EU referendum, commissioned the as yet unreleased snap poll shortly before MPs voted down Theresa May’s Brexit deal. The Populus poll asked 2,000 people whether they would be more or less likely to vote Labour “if they commit to stop Brexit”.

The polling also showed the party would lose around the same number of Labour voters as it would gain from the Conservatives.

Just 9% of Conservative voters would switch to Labour in those circumstances, but 11% of current Labour voters said it would make them less likely to vote for the party.

 

Source: Voters less likely to back Labour with ‘stop Brexit’ policy, leaked poll suggests | Politics | The Guardian

Theresa May Brexit deal hammered in parliament, but be wary of prospects of a new ‘consensus’ approach : The Conversation


Another day, another record. The 230 majority against the motion to approve Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement on the UK’s exit from the EU smashes pretty much any parliamentary record one cares to discover.

That May’s immediate response was to make time for the house to debate and vote on Labour’s motion of no-confidence in her the day after her loss was thus hardly a surprise: how else to respond to such a heavy blow against the central platform and policy of the government?

And yet the abiding impression of these events was of avoiding a resolution, for as long as possible. Most obviously, May did not offer her resignation. That was a reflection not of her principles but rather her analysis of the situation. As she noted in her statement, a lack of majority for her deal doesn’t mean there’s a majority for another course of action. Without that alternative majority, she clearly feels there is still everything to play for and she is the right person for the job.

In essence, what May offered parliament was a “put-up or shut-up” proposition. Should the government win the confidence motion – which looks very likely indeed – she will hold a series of cross-party talks, inviting parliament to bring ideas and suggestions about how to build a majority position. The results will then be put to the EU for negotiation and agreement.

 

Source: Theresa May Brexit deal hammered in parliament, but be wary of prospects of a new ‘consensus’ approach : The Conversation

Surprising new evidence shows the UK is actually united on Brexit | The Canary


Survation has released new polling on people’s attitudes to Brexit and the political parties. And one statement unitedsupporters of the Conservatives and Labour, along with Leavers and Remainers, much more than usual:

All MPs, regardless of their party or position on Brexit, should compromise and agree on a Brexit deal that honours the referendum result.

 

Source: Surprising new evidence shows the UK is actually united on Brexit | The Canary

Brexit is not an end to Britain’s liaison with Europe. It’s just a new beginning | Dan Snow | Opinion | The Guardian


They are sick of the whole thing. They just want it to be over. No more uncertainty. Brexiteers want resolution. They will be disappointed. Willing something does not make it so. Aethelred wanted Viking raids to stop. The kingdoms of Wales, Scotland and Ireland wished the Norman and Plantagenet monarchs of England would cease their predatory lunges into their territory. Neville Chamberlain hoped that Hitler would be content with Czechoslovakia. Oliver Letwin wished there was an island we could send all migrants to. The hopes of politicians and rulers are whispers in a gale.

There is no end state in our relations with Europe. There is only millennia of collaboration, conquest, disputes, exchange, competition and alliance.

We live on a small archipelago just off the north-west coast of Europe. We are not a tribe cocooned by towering, razor-sharp mountain ridges in the New Guinea highlands. We are connected. At times, continental armies have marched across the fields of Wiltshire, Wexford and West Lothian. At others, the British have watered their horses in the Seine, Rhine and Danube. The seas around us have facilitated exchange, not prevented it. People, ideas and stuff have crossed the water, mocking the decrees of princes and parliaments.

 

Source: Brexit is not an end to Britain’s liaison with Europe. It’s just a new beginning | Dan Snow | Opinion | The Guardian

Company behind People’s Vote used controversial Blue Telecoms in referendum campaign | The SKWAWKBOX


  • Open Britain, the company behind the People’s Vote campaign, was originally The In Campaign/Stronger In
  • Blue Telecoms was the company exposed in a Channel 4 undercover operation that led to a warning to the Tories from the Information Commissioner and a lengthy police investigation
  • TIC/Stronger In also contracted Blue Telecoms for apparently identical services, according to Blue Telecoms’ CEO

For full disclosure, the author of this article voted ‘remain’ in the EU referendum.

Saturday’s march in London by the “People’s Vote” campaign that is run by the organisation Open Britain has highlighted the strength of feeling among a significant number of people eager to reverse the UK’s impending departure from the European Union.

Stronger In

Open Britain claims to be a ‘grassroots’ campaign, but is run by or associated with an array of centrists and Tories – and critics of the campaign have accused it of being a vehicle for attacks on the Labour leadership.

 

Source: Company behind People’s Vote used controversial Blue Telecoms in referendum campaign | The SKWAWKBOX