How do we celebrate (or mourn, if you’re a remainer) Freedom Day 2019?

If it hasn’t happened already, I daresay it won’t be long before a public competition (no doubt to be won by an infant school wunderkind) is launched for events to mark the day the UK gains its freedom from the EU (although we should all know by now that it won’t happen for real until the end of 2021 – the almost two-year long extension to satisfy industry and institutions without the wit to use the two years of exit negotiations to sort themselves out! How they can call themselves ‘entrepreneurs’, I find pretentious beyond belief!)

My favourite suggestion so far (in the Daily Telegraph today – 29/3/18) is another Bonfire Night with the bogeymen of the Brussels bureaucracy being burnt in effigy instead of Guy Fawkes. The postscript to that suggestion was that Sir John Major and Tony Blair should be first reserves. Personally, I think the late Sir Edward Heath should be the first on the bonny.

I suspect that some of the present Cabinet and the Prime Minister herself could feature on the list, if the people of UK feel let down by whatever the final agreement comes up with, especially if the final price tag is more than we currently pay over two years for full membership and/or there is no end in sight for unlimited immigration from the EU.

We Got what We Deserved!

So there we have it! Stuck with a hung parliament, because of the unaffordable promises of a Trotskyist Communist, who could not possibly be given security clearance for any job in the civil or armed services, because of his political beliefs – a man who has supported every anti-British terrorist group that has operated against the interests of civilised people, since he entered parliament.

And why?

First, because of a Tory campaign that seemed to be designed about a death wish. An election not so much lost as thrown away!

Second, because we allow immature people, who are totally unfit to make judgments on what is and is not good for the country to vote – people who are happy to sell the country down the river for the sake of their own short-term interests: i.e. students who don’t want to pay for their own tertiary education; people who have saved all their working lives and acquired a nest egg to pay for their own care in later life, only to change their minds and decide they would rather hand their savings over to their families after they’ve gone and let the taxpayers pay for their care in old age; people who want to hang on to relatively small free handouts from government – i.e: winter fuel allowance, free TV licences etc – even when they are well off enough to pass such amounts straight through to the charity of their choice – actually mostly passed on to grandchildren to be squandered on holidays in the sun!

Now the pundits are telling us that we’ll have to go on bended knee to the EU to get any agreement on Brexit.

Sorry folks! We don’t want any agreement with the EU that involves anything but their total capitulation to us to give them access to our market, without punitive import taxes in response to their expected attitude towards us. The OECD reckons we can reach a deal quite amicably with other markets without any need for huge re-negotiations of EU treaties. Go for it, I say.

We must take up the EU challenge and say we’re ready to meet on Monday – then when they start chortling and making ridiculous demands, get up and walk out, with the throwaway remark: “Don’t call us, we’ll call you – and don’t hold your breath!”

No Way to Negotiate

“When you make a moderate proposal, they will react with blank stares and look at you as if you were reciting the Swedish National Anthem.” So says Yanis Varoufakis the former Greek finance minister of negotiating with the EU. His advice to Theresa May is simple: don’t. If you make any concession to them you will finish up surrendering and conceding victory.

Now, the Greeks went into negotiations in a position of extreme weakness – they were broke and had suffered under years of economic illiteracy. GB Ltd enters negotiations in a position of strength. We no longer want membership of a club that is corrupt, whose books have not been signed off in an audit since it was founded and whose founders admitted that the principles of democracy must be denied to its electorate in case they decided they’d rather retain control of their own national governments.

Let’s hope TM follows this timely advice IF she wins the election with an increased majority. My advice is that in any negotiation you must be prepared to walk out, if the other side is simply not listening. Every indication is that they’re not and we haven’t even begun negotiations!

EU Referendum

So here we go at last with ministers and MPs free to speak their minds – oh, what a nasty campaign will follow now right up to 23 June. Will it be in or out – Brexit or Fixit?

The ‘ins’ are muddying the water already, talking about our security being dependent on membership of the EU. God help us if it did! It never has and hopefully never will. Our security as a country depends on our own Armed Forces and our membership of NATO.

They are also saying that we are better off in a reformed EU.

The EU is beyond reform and in any case has NO intention of reforming. It is far too comfortable for its officials and MEPs to want anything to do with reform. David Cameron, however hard he worked, had no idea how to begin negotiating the reforms he wanted and has come back with nothing. You just DON’T go into negotiations – even with friends and relations – by telling the other side that you want a solution that makes it look as if nothing has changed.

If we don’t understand now how two-faced the EU can be, we never will and we’ll deserve everything they do to revenge themselves on us for having the nerve to even ask for reform.

How can anyone say that DC has achieved major reforms? He hasn’t and never will. There is no thought of treaty change and therefore the UK will be bound by the same set of EU laws after an IN vote as before. Anything DC thought he had negotiated will be ignored and/or reneged on. They’ve done it before and will do it again.

DC talks about being able to influence the ‘on-going’ process of EU reform from within if we vote IN. Hasn’t he learnt yet that we have absolutely no influence in the EU? Anything and everything put forward by us is automatically thrown out by majority voting. That’s not influence – it’s vengeance. Even the man in the streets of Moscow and St Petersburg cannot understand how we can possibly think that belonging to the ‘Soviet Union of Europe’ can be a good thing, when we put so much effort into achieving ‘perestroika’ in Russia with the help of the Russian people who were sick and tired of having communism thrust down their throats. The socialist nonsense that comes out of the EU Commission is NOT what most sensible people in the West want. We need the freedom that comes with real democracy – something the EU dreads and has no time for.

The in/out vote is not about economics or even about the vexed question of immigration. It’s about who governs our country – unelected officials in the EU Commission or MPs the electorate of the UK voted in to do the job for us.

I sincerely hope people wake up to that before it’s too late. This will be our last chance. No UK Bill of Rights can get us out of the mess that is Europe. We have to vote with our feet.

Democracy – Introduction

I HAVE BEEN re-reading some stuff I wrote a few years back before the credit crunch that triggered the financial crises in 2008/9. Much of what I wrote was about the deterioration of many of GB’s institutions and the rights and wrongs of what passes for a democratic way of life. I also generalised over the downward trend in our moral fibre as a nation that can no longer lay claim to the high ground of Britishness that once set an example to a great Empire and Commonwealth.

Much water has flown under the bridge since a succession of Labour governments dragged us down to meet their lowest common denominator. In addition, we have endured five years of coalition government that brought much stagnation and very little of the reconstruction needed, There is now a glimpse of a new dawn as the sun sets on Labour’s chances of ever being anything but a party of negativism, doomed to fight battles that were lost in the eighties and nineties, when Margaret Thatcher was still a force to be reckoned with.

Nevertheless, much of what I wrote then was about the fundamentals of our so-called democratic institutions, indeed, about our version of democracy. I do not recognise much to do with government of the people, by the people for the people within the ‘Mother of Parliaments’. What I do see bears little resemblance to what Solon created in Athens over two and a half millennia ago. Admittedly he didn’t have to contend with a world that accepted every self-declared sane man and woman living in his City State as a candidate for a say in what went on. As far as people in those far off times were concerned only male landowners and aristocrats (usually one and the same) were entitled to the vote, a state of affairs that was not fully put right (if, indeed, that’s the right phrase) until universal suffrage was introduced by stages in Great Britain.

Politicians then were fairly smug about what they had achieved, thinking perhaps that the change would make very little difference to how the system worked. How wrong they were. But did the changes that came about through the ballot box do this country any real good? I don’t think so. They may have made the do-gooders feel better but it took much more change in the fundamentals of social life than saying that now every Tom, Dick and Harry and his missus could vote.

The party system didn’t change. The selection of candidates eligible to stand for Parliament didn’t change much. If anything the opposing camps simply fortified their enclosures and made sure that only their activists – those who could be counted on to follow the party line – stood any chance of making it to the Palace of Westminster.

Of course, they had to be more assiduous in their efforts to make sure the electorate made it to the ballot box and put their crosses in the right boxes. They had to fight at the hustings (or latterly on the internet or telephone, being too lazy to go door-stepping) to persuade those whose arms they couldn’t physically twist to turn up and vote. This all took money and that meant (even more) opportunity for corruption.

At least in the days of a paternalistic aristocracy/landowning class government there was always the chance of genuine competition between rival interests. There was also the strong probability that an electorate formed of property owners, whatever the personal differences between factions, would give survival and prosperity of the state more than a passing chance of winning crucial arguments. Such people may or may not have had the support of the people whose livelihoods depended on them, but they didn’t have to curry favour with them to fight their corner. Randomness of birth and quirks of nature will have ensured at least a chance of original thinking somewhere in the process.