POLITICS CORNER

[Stanley]

Exactly P, but our side see this as bullying......

[Stanley]

They didn't bother yesterday, all on holiday or campaigning. Who's looking after the shop?
Looking at the political comment, there are the first signs that May's 'remote' style of campaigning based on transparently obvious key spin words and refusal to discuss policies is not going down as well as Corbyn's willingness to talk to individuals and give clear policy direction. I don't see how the Tories can duck the real issues much longer.....
One idea that seems to be gaining traction with opposing parties is that if we can guarantee 10% of GDP on defence and 0.7% on foreign aid why can't we do the same for the NHS. The figure being quoted is 11% the same roughly as France and Germany. If nothing else this is flagging up what a good deal the NHS is economically as nobody is taking a profit out of it.
France votes today for a new President.
See THIS for a BBC report of noises coming out of Brussels describing UK as being "on a different planet" in their expectations of what the negotiations are going to be about. The EU is united in wanting the divorce settlement agreed first while May still tries to project herself as 'a strong leader seeking trade deals' and describes the reports as 'Brussels gossip'. As I have repeatedly said she holds none of the cards and might as well go with Brussels instead of arguing with them. They are adamant, the treaty liabilities have to be agreed before any further subjects are addressed. My impression is that the EU are actually incredulous when they listen to May and realise how out of touch she is.
On balance, forget the two years and if she sticks to her word the likelihood of the 'Hard Brexit' increases which is bad news for all of us. Forget the 'plucky little Britain' and 'Land of Hope and glory' rhetoric. This is an imminent disaster. Meanwhile Cameron build himself a shed......

[plaques]

Inequality and the Hard Brexit.

Thomas Piketty has proved that inequality of capital has increased over the last 50 years to a point which puts countries at risk. Prior to the 1st and 2nd World wars the majority of the capital within Europe was held by the various monarchies and large land owners plus some very wealthy individuals. (old money). The wars effectively destroyed the capital they held in buildings and businesses bringing in a more inclusive political order. This allowed new innovations through technology to take hold which in turn further destroyed much of the old order. (destructive innovation). Piketty’s studies show that although there is new money within the top 1% the risk of returning to an elite controlled structure is very high. Usually this takes the form of restrictive practices, monopolies and cartels that prevent upward mobility through new destructive innovation. Once this happens the Country involved is in a downward spiral of living standards.
The danger posed by a hard Brexit is that the promised trade deals outside the EU will take years to establish and that dealing with the EU will be intrinsically more expensive putting our manufacturing at a disadvantage. The alternative of becoming a low tax haven for international hot money will only benefit those in the banking world creating a race to the bottom for the rest of industry. The money extracted from this process will be concentrated in fewer hands leaving innovation and the development of new technologies to wither on the vine. No more destructive innovation. The controlling elite will of course see nothing wrong with this process since after all it put them at the top.

[Stanley]

Perfect recall P! Reinforced by the fact that Piketty's extensive research proves beyond doubt that the other beneficial factor from 1950-1980 that fuelled the rise in standards of living and quality of life was progressive taxation and investment in R&D and manufacturing industry, adding value. The tragedy for the wealthy is that by ignoring voices like Piketty and Stiglitz they are eroding the fabric of society without which their comfortable life will be destroyed by increased social instability. We are seeing it happen now but they are too thick to understand it.
From your mouth to God's Ear!
I listened to May promising she will be 'Bloody Difficult'. This is diametrically the opposite of what is needed for good negotiation and accommodation. She is, in effect, guaranteeing us the worst possible outcome and 20+ years of misery at least. In the process she will destroy the union and make us the laughing stock of the world. Safe in our hands?

[Tizer]

The one thing that keeps cropping up at regular intervals is the thorny issue about the Britex Divorce Settlement.

Brussels describing UK as being "on a different planet" in their expectations of what the negotiations are going to be about...the EU are actually incredulous when they listen to May and realise how out of touch she is.

Richard warned us that our Brexiteering politicians don't understand how the EU works. And here we are again today...the FT says we will owe the EU 100 billion euros. David Davis says that's only the headline figure and we won't really have to pay all that because much of it comes back to us. Now where have I heard something like that before? Oh yes, someone called Boris Johnson arguing with John Humphrys the other morning and still claiming that we pay the EU £350 million a week, even though we know that much of it comes back in payments to the UK. Davis and Johnson can't have it both ways.

[Bruff]

Tory leaflet dropped through the door last night. ‘Strong and stable’ is the phrase de nos jours. If I could paraphrase, the leaflet essentially said: ‘We are the party of strength and stability, securing stabilised strength and strengthened stability through strong and stable strength and stable and strong stability'.

The late journalist Simon Hoggart used to say that the way to determine whether a party slogan was meaningless was to state the opposite. If this was so self-evidently idiotic then the slogan was meaningless and the party was taking you for a fool. So for ‘strong and stable’, read ‘weak and precarious’. Only an idiot would want that ergo the Tories are taking us for fools. It works both ways of course: ‘education, education, education’ becomes ‘ignorance, ignorance, ignorance’.

Still, the public laps it up.

The PM says Mr Juncker will soon find she’s a ‘bloody difficult woman’. Oooooo, get her and her big interview muscles! Have we heard anything more childish in recent times? This country is fast becoming an international laughing stock. I recall the Irish Minister for Europe at the weekend having to explain the separate legal bases that prevent parallel trade an Art50 talks to the country in a BBC interview, in much that same way a teacher explains the most simple of things to a particularly dim child. By God are we going to be given an education these next months (M Barnier, the Commission’s Chief Negotiator, did note that this would be a pedagogic exercise as much as anything, probably referencing the deep ignorance on the UK side).

The latest reported madness was the PM noting to a startled EC delegation at the dinner last week, that the negotiators should meet for 4 days each month with briefing papers in advance….. but all of it secret. The EC side had to politely note that much of this secrecy was a essentially a non-runner as they had the European Parliament and National and Regional Governments and Parliaments to keep informed as well as their populations. To M Barnier’s pedagogy, I would add it’ll be lesson (for us at least) in Open Government.

Been away for a while. Thinking quite a bit about what we might do over the coming years. My wife graduates in a month or so (that’s flown by) and she has lots of business ideas and I’m thinking about different things to do. We don’t really want to hang around this country and so are starting to think about clearing off to Europe sometime the next 5 years or so . Course, as this is likely not to be as easy as now, we need to plan well as we need for example to ensure we have significant capital and income.

Richard Broughton

[Bruff]

Ah, M Barnier is giving a press conference right now.

He says as a negotiator, his focus will be on ‘..facts, figures, laws and solutions..’. Whoops, that’s our difficulty right there.

Facts are rather passé in UK public life and have been for some time. You can essentially say what you want, forcefully and with passion, and folk will believe any old tosh. His insistence on ‘facts’ is likely to be met with a slack-jawed gaze. Same with figures – these are so routinely abused Dennis Skinner said ONS staff should get a bonus for so compromising their integrity. £350M on the side of a bus anyone? Again, this will be met with glazed eyes and a vacant stare. Laws? No chance as hardly anyone here knows the corpus of EU law, what it is and how it operates, and best it stays that way case folk realise they’ve been lied to for years. Solutions? We might get somewhere here as the PM wants a ‘solution’ that ‘works for everyone’. But remember Simon Hoggart – ‘works for everyone’ as opposed to ‘works for no one’. Meaningless. Not least as being one of the ‘everyone’ the only deal that would work for me is one that preserved free movement.

Oh well, it’s early days….

Richard Broughton

[Bruff]

Here it is, hot off the press - the Annex to the European Council Decision on opening the negotiations with the UK under Art 50.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/fi ... 017_en.pdf

These are the Directives for the negotiations as the EU sees them. For info, each of these Directives will likely have a Technical Working Group made up of pan-EU experts and specialists to develop the facts and figures and the legal position(s), the evidence and the arguments and so on.

I guess we can all look forward to the UK Government’s equivalent being made available, somewhere, for us all to read at some stage………..

Richard Broughton

[PanBiker]

I think that's called "getting your act together" isn't it?

I won't hold my breath for what our lot come up with.

[Tripps]

But remember Simon Hoggart – ‘works for everyone’ as opposed to ‘works for no one’. Meaningless

Let's try an 'alternative' opposite -

'works for everyone as opposed to works for some' .

You are certainly more informed than almost everyone I know in these matters Richard - what should we do? Is it too late to change anything or do we have to rely on this bunch of ignorant incompetents to represent our interest?

[PanBiker]

Is it too late to change anything or do we have to rely on this bunch of ignorant incompetents to represent our interest?

The peasants could become revolting.

[plaques]

Well I never. Welcome to Theresa in wonderland.
To paraphrase Humpty Dumpty .""But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Theresa objected. "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less." ... "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."

Just two points from Bruff's reference.

(a) A calculation of the global amount that the United Kingdom has to honour in
order to settle its financial obligations toward the Union budget, all institutions
or bodies established by the Treaties, and other issues with a financial impact.
The global amount may be subject to future annual technical adjustments.

(b) A schedule of the annual payments to be made by the United Kingdom and the
practical modalities for making these payments.

All together now.
We shall not be Bullied. Strong and Stable. (Lions led by Donkeys.)

[Stanley]

Wonderful if depressing posts. I agree with you David about Richard's expertise in these and other matters. I take note of everything he says!
Richard said " This country is fast becoming an international laughing stock.". I didn't think May's attitude could get any worse but in her statement yesterday she managed to go much further when she accused the EU of attempting to interfere in the General Election. So, add paranoia to incompetence and mendacity. The EU reaction was predictable, hoots of laughter. But, and it's a big but, I think that she has now moved on to a higher plane of deviousness. Listen carefully to what she said, she has made the EU spot ball when the economic situation turns sour (I am predicting this of course). In x months time, when the real cause of this election strikes, a rapidly deteriorating economic position due to incompetent economic policies, she will quote this and say "I told you so. We are in this mess because of EU bullying and intransigence." There is the possibility that this election is an opportunistic con trick to extend Tory power to 2020 taking advantage of the fog of war over Brexit, deliberately creating 'hard Brexit' and playing the biggest off-shore money laundering scenario in retaliation. Remember that this is what she has already threatened in public. This will suit the banks and the city but will be a disaster for the rest of us. A side benefit will be the continuing project to take the vast majority of the electorate back to a 19th century laisser faire system. Pure Old Tory DNA.
Yes I am a cynic but I really do believe that there is more than a whiff of truth in this scenario. Tin hats on Lads!!
PS. It's just struck me that there are disturbing similarities between the May approach to the EU and Hitler's tactics when building power in the 1930s. He too said they needed a strong stable leader and played the fear card by saying everybody was against them.
I have just been distracted by news from Margaret that in Oz suspicions are being voiced that Prince Philip has died......
05:25. French media are reporting him dead. Nothing expected here until 8AM, the usual time for royal announcements. So, Brexit, General Election and a Royal funeral..... The media are going to have a field day! {It looks as though Margaret was spot on.....}

[Stanley]

Margaret and I fell for the rumour but I still think there is more to this than meets the eye....
Listening to the election coverage on BBC. It doesn't look good for Labour or the LibDems. UKIP appear to have had a disastrous night. I am not looking forward to the Tory party reaction to this later in the day.
We always assume that local elections are no guide to the national vote but this one is different and on this showing we are doomed to having Mrs May for another five years. I am not a happy bunny!

[Big Kev]

http://www3.lancashire.gov.uk/elect ... lldivs.asp

[PanBiker]

Pendle Rural declared:

Jenny Purcell and David Whipp elected.

Pendle Rural

[Big Kev]

Pendle Rural declared:

Jenny Purcell and David Whipp elected.

Pendle Rural

Two Barlickers, a good result.

[PanBiker]

All areas now declared. Only 80 votes between David Whipp and the other Tory. Looks like Pendle was the highest turnout at 53% most other seats were in the mid 30's, not a very high turnout for such a good polling day.

Con: 46
Lab: 30
Lib: 4
Ind: 2
Grn: 1
UKIP: 1

[Stanley]

When I saw what was happening my mind went back to Mrs T..... I spent too long voting Labour and seeing Grayson walk back into Skipton when I lived in Earby. My main anger is directed at the disloyal Labour MPs too busy fighting their own leader because they don't like democratic election processes but want all the power themselves.... Can some miracle prevent this being translated into a General Election result? Watch and pray!

[PanBiker]

Some of the Tory gains were very marginal, 8 votes in one 15 in another, very low turnouts in most areas as well, 30%, 32%. Pendle Rural was the largest at 74.49% but that was the exception rather than the rule.

County and General Elections should not be allowed to be decided on less than a third of the electorate, it is not a mandate to govern in my view. Time to introduce compulsory voting I reckon. We have heard from our Aussie contingent how they regard voting as a civic duty why can't we make it so here? They have been doing is along time in Oz and it's now regarded as the norm, you have to make a start somewhere. Put an abstain box on the ballot and fine them that can't be bothered, at least they can help pay for everyone else's democracy.

[PanBiker]

Some of the Tory gains were very marginal, 8 votes in one 15 in another, very low turnouts in most areas as well, 30%, 32%. Pendle Rural was the largest at 74.49% but that was the exception rather than the rule.

Just seen on Facebook that the Pendle Rural turnout was doubled as it was a double seat. In that case the overall turnout across the County was dire, they are all in on a minority ticket, shameful for a democracy.

[Stanley]

We live in a funny old world. Look at climate change and the weird weather patterns it is producing and transfer that logic to political systems. We've seen weird results in other countries but especially so in UK. I've long believed that the tectonic plates of politics are changing, it came to me with the expenses scandal. That took us into an era of uncertainty from 2010 onwards and by an accident of fate we got two weak and incompetent politicians, Cameron and Osborne setting policies. Their economic policies are eroding society and in the process destabilising it. A La Piketty, this leads to even more stresses and in his opinion, unless these were alleviated by some balancing towards progressive tax systems world wide the natural outcome in the long term is civil unrest.
Suppose the patterns we are seeing in politics are another facet of this insecurity, this could explain why we are almost certainly going to get a Tory landslide in June which, if it happens, guarantees us 20+ years of worsening conditions for the lower 85 percentile. Only a hypothesis but it makes sense.
The LibDems got culled after their shameful cooperation with the Tories. The Labour Party could be in for the same fate. If nothing else, this should ensure that Corbyn's version of Major's 'bastards' are up for the chop in many cases. Serves them right!
You're right, I am in a vindictive mood, it might be time for the Augean stables to be cleansed!
[Of course there could be a miracle, but I reckon that won't come until 2022......]

[plaques]

In the good old days of colonialism the first thing that we enterprising British did was to make the indigenous people poorer. That way we could pay minimum wages and extract as much capital as possible without going to all the trouble of modernizing the country. This system of extraction without replacement can only last so long. Eventually the country collapses economically into abject poverty or disastrous rebellion. Nowadays we don't say "we are going to make you poorer" we call it austerity. Wages lag behind prices, services are cut and investment is curtailed. Some of this may be excusable if the country was investing in the future by modernization and investment in modern technology. Tony Blair offered up this 'modernization' route before he got sidetracked with Bush into Iraq. Unfortunately for him, although the strategy may have been correct, he never got passed the point where it could be diverted into traditional capital extraction.
The biggest fear with (strong and stable) Mrs May is that we could be going down the old colonial route. Moving out of Europe could lead to us turning our backs on those scientific innovations that require massive capital investments that individual countries can no longer afford or risk taking on. Think nuclear power stations and even high speed trains. Of course you won't hear anyone talking about these concerns just a lot of invective 'Blah- Blah' from the rightwing press and wall to wall strong and stable slogans.

[Tizer]

The worst aspect of all in my view is the loss of liberal values. Politics in many countries is polarising into an extreme right and extreme left with little in between. It's not just politics, it's getting worse in the media and even within the populations. Compassion and generosity are giving way to anger and selfishness. I won't vote for May or Corbyn or UKIP, I've always been suspicious of the Greens, so I'm left with LibDem but they don't stand much chance because they're the dwindling in-betweeners. I wish that a new, more effective party could come out of Labour but I wouldn't want it led by Corbyn, it would need someone who can convince others to come over to its side (and give it a new name, more appropriate for the 21st Century). Corbyn gets lots of adulation from his close supporters but he speaks to the converted and ignores the others. We hear so many former Labour supporters saying they won't vote for Corbyn. He's not trying to win them back and they feel let down. How about Sadiq Khan? He's very popular, he's a transformational leader, and he did more to support the Remainers than Corbyn did. He's 21st Century as opposed to Corbyn's `beer and sandwiches in Islington' hybrid image. I'd vote Labour if he were the leader and a possible future PM. There, I've nailed my colours to the mast! You can make me walk the gangplank now if you wish!

[Stanley]

Everybody is allowed their opinion Tiz and your analysis is sound I fear as is Plaques'.
I might be speaking for both of you when I say that I despair when I look at the state of public debate today. It is so shallow, not based on intelligence and appreciation of subject matter but blown this way and that by manipulative media and spin, both main stream and the social networks. I admit that this might be an old man speaking and I may have it wrong but I can only operate on old-fashioned evidence like experience and reading the history. These factors convince me that the most effective political strategies I have seen were all based on either unity in the face of a common enemy or sound principles designed to effect the maximum improvement for the majority of society. Essential to this was the ethos where politicians were honest and had a deep desire to serve in the cause of the greater good. That being the case I can only vote on policy and as I have been a loyal Labour supporter all my life I have to vote for them in a national election.
I said yesterday I was angry and vindictive, that's on the surface at the moment but mainly I am sad because we are leaving the brightest hope for the future, cooperation with Europe and the wider world in pursuit of a different world order than the one that gave us two world wars. Add to this the antediluvian mores of the hard right wing Tories which I am convinced are hell bent on taking us back to the 'good old days' of laisser faire and inequality in which the rich get richer at the expense of the poor and you have a perfect recipe for years of decline and deprivation. Here I stand, I can do no other.
The vandal Trump is not only rejecting the clear evidence of science in the vaccination debate but is almost certain to announce that the US is going to reject the Paris Agreement, he 'believes that climate change is a hoax. Look at his recent policy changes on energy extraction. In case you have forgotten, this man has the power to set us back fifty years and it will have global repercussions.
Macron has won the Presidency. It remains to be seen whether this can be translated into power in the Assembly. En Marche has no representatives in the Assembly.
Reasons to be cheerful anyone?