The true history of Brexit Britain: the real coalition

 I've been busy with the glue and paste and I've manged to piece together another section of the New Oxford History of Brexit Britain written some time after 2050. Read it ONLY HERE:

When people talked about ‘the coalition’ in the 2020s, they invariably meant the Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government that ruled from 2010 to 2015, but the real coalition in British politics was the one between two ostensibly bitter rivals, the Conservative Party and the Labour Party. And although, the Labour Party was an enthusiastic participant, this coalition was fiercely conservative, resolutely blocking the changes that Britain needed, to solve its deep-seated, long-standing problems.

The Labour-Conservative coalition obstinately defended Brexit even when most British people had long ago realised it was a terrible mistake, and that it had been imposed on them by a political process that could most kindly be described as ‘unsatisfactory’, and which had effectively been ruled illegal.

The Conservative-Labour coalition also fought like tigers against any reform of the undemocratic ‘First Past the Post’ voting system, which constantly awarded virtually absolute power to politicians most voters had rejected.

So more than 63 per cent had voted against the notorious Conservative government of 2015 that implemented the disastrous Brexit referendum, while more than 56 per cent had opposed Boris Johnson’s vacuous ‘get Brexit done’ regime in 2019, and in the three supposed Thatcher 'landslides' of 1979-1987 she never won more than 43.9 per cent of the vote. But Labour also benefited from this undemocracy, with Tony Blair gaining his first ‘landslide’ in 1997 with only 43 per cent of the vote, and his last election victory in 2005 with just 35 per cent. In other words, nearly two-thirds of voters opposed him.

As the 21^st century progressed, there was more and more agonising and hand-wringing from Labour and Conservative politicians about how voters were ‘alienated’ from the political process and about how dangerous this was. Yet it seemed to occur to few of them that constantly imposing on the British people governments they did not want would surely cause ‘alienation.’

As we now know, this fierce conservatism over Brexit and the electoral system would have severe consequences for both parties, and, sadly, for the people of Britain.

Brexitwatch: A warning from the future, for Labour

 Working painstakingly with paper and glue I have managed to put together another passage from The New Oxford History of England: Brexit 2015-, presented to me by Sybil, the emissary from the future, in the obscure corner of North London pictured above:

‘Labour was in power for 13 years under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. It could have brought in proportional representation for electing MPs, which would have made it impossible for a Conservative government ever again to win power when the majority had voted against it.

Unfortunately, Labour decided that stopping this disaster was less important than preserving the chance for its own MPs to lord it over the country even when the majority had opposed them. The result was that in 2010, after 13 years of Labour, the Conservatives were back for even longer, with what was up to then the most right-wing government the UK has seen in modern times, which took the disastrous decision to leave the EU.

So when Sir Keir Starmer won the general election of 2024, there were some hopes that Labour might have learned from this bitter experience, and that this time it would put the interests of its voters and the country before narrow party advantage, but history repeated itself.

The size of Starmer’s parliamentary majority was enough to obscure the uncomfortable fact that once again most of those who had turned out had voted against the government now given virtually absolute power over them. Hardly anyone in the Labour Party had the courage to point out that this could not be regarded as democratic, and proportional representation was rarely mentioned.

While Labour wrestled with the dreadful mess the Conservatives had left them, their opponents regrouped and ruthlessly attacked the new government's performance, so that after five years of Labour, the Tories were back again with a working majority on yet another minority share of the vote, with all the catastrophic consequences we have seen.

 

Election reflections: remember Charter 88?

Who now remembers Charter 88, founded in 1988, when the Tories had been in power, like today, for 9 years, having won three general elections? More than 85,000 people signed its demands for a written constitution, an elected second chamber, and a freedom of information act among other things.

But the most important demand in my view was proportional representation for the House of Commons. The existing system, first-past-the-post (FPTP), means British governments are formed by parties that most people have voted against. If you want to know why so many people are disillusioned with politics and feel their vote doesn’t matter, here surely is the main reason.

I became quite active in Charter 88 locally. Tories were almost universally hostile, but Labour nodded in our direction. I was even at a Charter 88 party at which Tony Blair and Gordon Brown put in an appearance. Blink twice, though, and you would have missed them.

We had meetings with local Labour people, and, though I suppose I shouldn’t have been, I was taken aback at how tribal and hostile they were towards proportional representation. ‘How will we ever win an election under that system?’ seemed to be the main preoccupation.

In 1997, after 19 years in the wilderness, Labour finally won power, but although Blair had spoken fair words to the LibDems, in 13 years, the party did nothing to reform the electoral system. For 18 of the 31 years since Charter 88 was founded, Labour have been out of power, and it doesn’t look as though they’ll be coming back any time soon, particularly as in the past they have been so dependent on winning seats in Scotland.

Labour’s view still seems to be: FPTP means for most of the time the UK gets Tory governments that make our voters suffer, but that’s a price worth paying so that every so often we can get a go at being the government without winning a majority of votes. What a shame! If the party had thought a bit more about the interests of the nation, there would have been no Brexit and no Boris Johnson as prime minister.

Election reflection: Labour delusions persist

Wouldn’t it be nice if Labour showed a little humility after their catastrophic election performance? Especially as they were warned that their refusal to oppose Brexit would be a disaster.

Instead Lord Adonis (pictured), failed Labour candidate for the European Parliament, writing as Andrew Adonis in the New European, launches an attack on the LibDems, asking whether they should continue to exist!

Columnist Simon Jenkins writes in similar vein in the Guardian - https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/16/lib-dems-tories-split-vote-labour

Inconvenient fact: while Labour's vote collapsed, the LibDems' increased by three times more than the Tories'. But because Labour has always teamed up with the Conservatives to prevent reform of our undemocratic electoral system, the LibDems actually ended up with fewer MPs.

Adonis and Jenkins also seem unaware that the LibDems have more than 2,500 local councillors in England and Wales. Do they want them to be forced to join the Labour or Conservative parties too? And to hell with the people who voted for them? 

Oh and by the way, do they want the Greens disbanded as well, and what about other Remain parties like Plaid and the SNP? If they all packed up, the Brexiters could get on with the job of wrecking our country without anyone asking them awkward questions.

It is infantile and demeaning to blame others for your own failures. If this is the best Labour can do, they're going to be in the wilderness for a very long time.

Brexitwatch; Get back to the Commons! Write to your MP

Now Scotland's highest civil court has declared that Boris Johnson's silencing of parliament is illegal, MPs should be flooding back, occupying the House of Commons chamber, and continuing with the business of fighting the Brexit Coup. 

Email your MP to demand they get back there. This is what I've sent to mine - Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer:


Dear Sir Keir,

What are you waiting for? The courts have ruled that Boris Johnson’s suspension of parliament is illegal. 

The Court of Session, Scotland’s highest court, has delivered a damning verdict, with all three judges ruling that the suspension was 'motivated by the improper purpose of stymying parliament' and was therefore unlawful. 

Heaven knows what Messrs Johnson and Cummings had planned for when they'd got MPs out of the way.

You and your Labour colleagues need to get down to Westminster right now and get into the Chamber to work out what you can do to stop the Brexit Coup. Elect your own Speaker if necessary.

At the moment there is still time to stop Boris Johnson destroying British democracy, but if you pussyfoot around much longer, there won't be.

Yours sincerely,
John Withington 

Brexitwatch: a letter to the Speaker

House of Commons Speaker John Bercow has now joined judges, Remainers, MPs who ask difficult questions about Brexit, the EU and others among those demonised as 'Enemies of the People' by our extreme right-wing tabloids. His crime? He allowed MPs a vote on a matter of crucial national importance.

I have written to Mr Bercow at john.bercow.mp@parliament.uk and speakersoffice@parliament.uk to express my thanks, and to ask him to please carry on exercising his courage and wisdom on behalf of MPs' democratic rights in the weeks to come. He could become a very important figure as more sensible MPs try to halt the Brexit disaster.

This is what I said to him:

Dear Mr Bercow,

Thank you for standing up for democracy at this time of great national crisis and in the face of a bullying minority government that seems completely devoid of concern for the national interest.

The prime minister's pulling of the 'meaningful vote' in December was one of the most cynical acts of contempt for parliament that I can recall in my lifetime, which goes back almost as far as World War Two.

You will, of course, face vitriol and vilification for doing the right thing, but your courage and wisdom will be needed to help us many times in the weeks ahead.

Thank you again and good luck,

John Withington

Brexitwatch; will incuriosity kill democracy?

When social workers make errors that result in harm being caused to a child, MPs often lambast them for being ‘incurious’. They failed to ask enough questions.

What then are we to make of MPs themselves? Last week a proposal was put that the government should have to publish studies on the impact of Brexit on the UK before Parliament takes a final decision on how and whether we leave the EU.

Incredibly, 320 MPs, yes 320, voted against this, and it was narrowly defeated. In other words, 320 MPs want to be sure they do NOT know the effect Brexit will have on their constituents and the rest of the people of the UK before they push it through.

House of Commons Speaker John Bercow last week rightly warned that Brexit was endangering democracy in the UK. Unfortunately, among its biggest enemies are hundreds of MPs.

Brexitwatch: Broken Promise no 7 - 'taking control'

The Brexiters told us that if we voted to leave the EU, we would 'take control.' Apparently not.

With less than a month gone since the referendum, we have already had a prime minister that no one voted for imposed on us . So are the Brexiters demanding a general election? Apparently not.

The other thing we heard a lot about from the Leave campaign was that the UK parliament must be sovereign. So is it going to get a say on when our unelected prime minister gives notice to quit the EU under Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty? Not if the Brexiters get their way.

The minister in charge of Brexit, David Davis, appears determined to make sure Parliament has no control, but a number of British citizens are mounting legal challenges. Predictably they have been subjected to threats and racist abuse.