Brexit Election
As I have said for a long time, the next General Election will be fought on the Brexit issue. Voters will have to decide to vote for those candidates and/or parties either to leave or stay. The cyclotron of preference will separate the heavy and light particles to their respective locations but presumably there will be the confused and compromised that remain with various other positions. The issue is clearly divisive, it cannot be otherwise but at least following a first past the post election in over 600 constituences we might hope the Parliament will better represent the majority opinion, and the government will be able to govern. Unfortunately although Johnson now has a firm position of leave with or without a deal and Swinson has now positioned her party to remain, which to be fair has always been the Liberal stance, both traditional Conservative and Labour voters will be split on the issue which makes prediction difficult as the Labour areas in the referendum tended to vote leave. Corbyn is also a weak link on the Labour side both personally and politically as he has been forced to adopt a contradictory position to that he has always held. Further will disaffected remainers be prepared to vote for the shambles of a party he leads? In the end it will come down to the splitting of the vote between the parties: if the remain vote is split between labour and resurgent Liberal this could allow the leave Con or Brexit candidate to get in, and vice versa. Then the next problem if remain came out on top, whether Labour, Liberal and SNP could form a governing coalition, but that is another can of worms altogether!
The undermining of British sovereignty in economic and other spheres has been happening over decades. That was the precise nature and intent of the EC membership, piloted by Ted Heath about whom much has been written. The prevailing thought in 1950's political circles was that with decline of the British Empire, integration with Europe was the only viable alternative. That as Guy Verhofstadt pointed out remains a relevant question: can Britain stand alone without either British or European 'empires'?
ReplyDeleteBBC's 100 identities to children! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDT-Yj5n6zE
ReplyDeleteAs I understand it, the power to prorogue Parliament rests with the Sovereign, as it always has. At the same time the Queen constitutionally acts on the advice of her (prime) minister on the basis that person holds the confidence of the Parliament. As the sacking of Gough Whitlam proved, she also has the ability to sack her ministers if she loses confidence in them! If the Parliament doesn't like the advice being afforded, the 'loyal' opposition can lay a vote of 'no confidence', which if the government loses leads to a general election. Then the people decide. Both Labour and Scottish Nationalists have in cowardly manner rejected that option because they believe they would lose, although of course they have advanced other excuses. Now they are trying a 'back door' device of legal challenges which has ended up in the Supreme Court. No one has yet pointed out that as currently constituted the British court is not actually 'supreme' insofar it is subject both to the European Court of Justice and to the Court of Human Rights - but let that paradox pass despite the fact that it goes to the heart of the Brexit issue at least in the former case. As we all know the Courts constitutionally interpret the law rather than make it. However in interpreting, in practice, they also make. Their role in this case is made harder by the fact that the British Constitution is in Dicey's coinage, "unwritten and flexible", although on both counts this may be challenged. We are all aware of the concept of 'mens rea' in criminal cases but in this matter of personal legality, the Scottish court has presumed to know the intent of the Prime Minister. Hopefully the Supreme Court will avoid this pit fall and examine only action and how it chimes with constitutional convention and practical reality. The Prime Minister who is answerable to Parliament and ultimately the people has a difficult enough job without the Courts muddying the political waters still further.
ReplyDeleteGovernment fights back in Supreme Court
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMTcfvwF8yM
The Irish trade relationship: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmjTPr8j5p4
ReplyDelete'Mr Speaker' enshrines paradox. On his father's side he is the grandson of Jewish immigrants from Romania. Although a junior tennis champion was too short to go professional. He was a Conservative MP until he took on the role of Speaker in 2009. He was disliked by his own party and only got the job because the allegedly 'anti-semitic' Labour Party voted him in. He started his career as a member of the right wing, anti-immigration 'Monday Club'. He is avowedly anti-Brexit and used his position to allow the opposition to stymie efforts to leave the EU with or without a deal that many regard as contrary to convention. He has recently also opined to the press and held anti-Brexit secret negotiations with his European opposite number, both considered to be beyond his constitutional scope. Some have even suggested he might lead a coalition government if both he and Johnson leave their current posts. Certainly this would do his bloated ego no harm.
ReplyDelete