Dear Tory voters, don't say I never warned you

Oh my prophetic soul! This is what I wrote before the 2019 general election when I warned people not to vote Conservative. Much of the personnel has changed, but the disaster remains.

THURSDAY, 5 DECEMBER 2019

Electionwatch: pity Conservatives - they have no one to vote for

Conservatism, according to the Oxford English Dictionary means ‘commitment to traditional values and ideas.’ So neither Boris Johnson nor any of the maniacally nodding acolytes lining up as Tory candidates are Conservatives.

Johnson is not a detail man and has only a very tenuous grasp of facts, as numerous interviews have shown, which means he needs people to work out policies for him. So the person running 10 Downing Street’s policy unit is very important. And who is she? Step forward Munira Mirza, a ‘former’ member of the Trotskyite Revolutionary Communist Party, who has been helping to write the Tory manifesto.

Perhaps that explains its attacks on democracy on the now-notorious page 48, with its threats to undermine the independence of parliament and the judiciary and to elevate the prime minister above the law.

Even more important than Mirza is ‘Johnson’s brain’, Dominic Cummings, who has never denied that he is not a Conservative. Indeed, Cummings seems to be consumed with contempt for anyone who is not Dominic Cummings.

He was formally ruled to be in contempt of parliament because he refused to be questioned by a committee investigating fake news. Cummings has a particular disdain for our politically independent civil service and wants to abolish it. Civil servants have an infuriating habit of telling the truth.

And then there were those three mysterious years in Russia. Of course, the degree to which Boris Johnson and his party are under Putin’s thumb remains shrouded in mystery because Johnson is suppressing the official report that might shed some light on it. But what was Cummings doing while he was there? What links did he form with politicians and the security and intelligence services?

The modern Conservative Party is decidedly not conservative. A better label would be 'anarchist' or 'nihilist'. More than anyone they remind me of the 19^th century left-wing Russian extremist, Mikhail Bakunin, who said he would be happy only ‘when the whole world is engulfed in fire.’ He advocated smashing everything up in the hope that something better would arise to replace it.

Just so for today’s Tories: smash up the UK, the NHS, our links with the EU, Parliament, the judiciary, the civil service, your jobs, rights, opportunities, etc. And maybe a phoenix will rise from the ashes: perhaps a hyper-Thatcherite capitalist paradise, red in tooth and claw, with no nonsense about a welfare state or workers’ rights or the rich paying tax?

If you really have nothing to lose, you might consider voting Conservative. If you have ANYTHING to lose, think very, very carefully before you put the nihilists into power.

Brexitwatch: a (sort of) reply from Sir Keir Starmer

The story so far: I wrote to Labour leader, Sir Keir Starmer, who is also my MP, urging Labour to oppose Boris Johnson's disastrous Brexit 'deal', because supporting it would mean Labour would be tainted with its damaging consequences and would be disqualified from complaining about them (see my posts of 6 and 27 December). As you know, Labour whipped its MPs to support the deal and the vast majority obeyed. The main excuse being that if Labour opposed it, there was a danger of 'no deal', even though the deal would have passed comfortably without Labour votes.

I have now finally received a reply - not from Sir Keir, but from 'Lee' of the Labour Party. I will be responding but I would be interested in any thoughts readers have before I do. Here it is:

Dear John,

 

Thank you for your email to Keir Starmer MP in relation to Britain’s withdrawal from the E.U. At this point in time, Keir’s mailbag is so full that he has asked me to respond on his behalf. I’m very sorry for the delay in getting back to you.

  

Your strong views, arguments and observations have been duly noted and shared with the relevant policy teams.

 

The old divides of Remain and Leave are over. We now have two options: Johnson’s flawed trade deal with the EU, or the chaos of ending the transition period with no deal, which would mean substantial tariffs and barriers to trade. Neither one is ideal. Neither one will deliver for jobs, business or the economy.

 

We have always said that to crash out with no deal would be unthinkable. It would have created enormous uncertainty, endless negotiations and inflicted huge damage to businesses in highly exposed sectors, including manufacturing and farming.

 

With no option of renegotiating left, that is why we voted in the national interest by rejecting no deal.

 

Voting for this deal does not mean we welcome it: it is a choice between this and no deal. This is the better option for business, supply chains, the economy and jobs. This deal will provide some stability and certainty for businesses. Without it, we would have had no deal which would have meant investment and jobs lost across crucial sectors.

 

But, this is Johnson’s deal. He and his Government will own it and they must take full responsibility for their slowness and lack of preparedness – and for the promises they make and break. There was no reason that a deal this unambitious for the UK had to be left until the final days of the transition period. The decision to delay this deal has already done unnecessary damage to businesses and the economy.

 

Moreover, this deal falls far short of what the Government promised. It neglects services, which account for 80 per cent of our economy, and weakens our security measures. There was very little time for Parliament to scrutinise the deal properly because of the speed it must be passed as to avoid no deal. So much for ‘taking back control’ – this Government is arriving at the last minute with a deal that is more ‘be grateful you’ve got anything’.

 

More holes will be exposed in the coming weeks and months which must be mended in the future. Labour in Opposition and government would focus on improving and building on it and standing up for the country’s interests. This Government must now get into action and properly support British industries adjusting to new trading rules, building up local supply chains and expanding in to new markets, instead of casting them to one side as they have over recent months.

 

Labour are focussed entirely on making this the best country to grow up in and the best place to grow old in. This biggest challenges facing our country and our planet require co-operation and international solutions, and a Labour government will work with others with shared values to tackle those.

 

However, with the trade deal agreed, the task of securing the economy, protecting the NHS, and rebuilding the country will only have just begun. A Labour government will build on the foundations of this deal, stand up against any Tory attempts to dilute workers’ rights and environmental standards, and make the United Kingdom the best place to grow up and the best place to grow old.

 

Best wishes,   

  

Lee 

Membership Services and Correspondence  

The Labour Party 

 

Electionwatch: Labour promises Remain will not need a supermajority to win a Brexit referendum

I was disturbed by stories that if we get a Labour government in a position to hold a referendum on the terms on which the UK leaves the EU, it might require Remain to gain a supermajority to win - say 60% of all votes cast or the votes of 50% of the electorate. While, of course, Leave had 'won' the 2016 referendum with less than 52% of votes cast.

So I wrote to my MP, who happens to be Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer. It took a while to get a reply  (though I recognise he has been very busy), but now he has confirmed no supermajority would be needed. Email exchange here:

Dear John,

Thanks for your email. These stories are simply untrue. There would be no threshold or super-majority requirements in the referendum. It would be on the basis of a simple majority of the votes cast.

All the best,

Keir Starmer

Dear Sir Keir,

As you know I have many reservations about Labour's policy on Brexit, but I am now considering whether I should vote for you in the GE.

I am concerned, though, about stories that Labour will require a supermajority (of say 60-40) or perhaps a threshold of at least 50% of the electorate supporting Remain, in order for Brexit to be cancelled in any referendum on its terms. As no such requirements were imposed on the Brexit side when they 'won' the 2016 vote, it would plainly be intolerable if Remain were required to surmount a higher hurdle.

Can you please confirm that in any referendum on the Brexit terms, Remain will be required to reach only 50% + 1 of the vote for Brexit to be cancelled.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Electionwatch: Borismandias - a warning from poetry

I’ve always like Shelley’s famous poem, Ozymandias –

https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46565/ozymandias

The huge ancient statue of the ‘king of kings’ who had thought such a lot of himself but who no one now remembers – reduced to a few bits of rubble on the desert ground.

Boris Johnson is such a persistent liar that it is hard to be sure of anything about him, but, of one thing we can be certain. The man whose ambition as a child was to be ‘world king’, will one day be gone. And then the Conservatives will have to share the fate of Ozymandias or start the painful project of rebuilding themselves as a decent political party.

Just as he did with the 2016 Brexit referendum, Johnson has built the Tories’ 2019 General Election campaign around a cynical, amoral lie: ‘get Brexit done.’ (See my blog of 20 November.)

The Tories’ tragedy is that they have allowed Johnson’s poison to infect the whole party. Every single parliamentary candidate is signed up to his lie. Any with any real loyalty to their party would be defying Johnson and telling the truth: yes, you can have Brexit if you really want it, but it will make you poorer, it will destroy jobs, businesses, savings, opportunities and rights, and severely damage the NHS and other public services, while possibly destroying the UK.

That is the choice. So will Tory candidates find the courage to explain it, or will they consign a once-great political party to the fate of Ozymandias?

‘Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare

The lone and level sands stretch far away.’

Electionwatch: the great Brexit 'nothing to lose' illusion

‘No matter how bad things are,’ said the film star Kirk Douglas, ‘they can always be worse.’ And yet we are told that a lot of people voted for Brexit in 2016 because they believed their lives were so terrible, they couldn’t possibly be worse, so leaving the EU was worth a try.

A nanosecond’s reflection, of course, would have revealed that Kirk Douglas was right and they were wrong. Ever heard of Syria, Somalia, Ukraine? Are you homeless, or are you unable to get the medicine you need to keep you alive because of a no-deal Brexit? Have you got a job, do you use public services? If you really think you have nothing to lose, you may soon get a very rude awakening, because (apart from a few of the hyper-rich) those who voted most enthusiastically for Brexit are the ones most likely to be damaged by it.

What I find most striking about the 2019 General Election campaign is that with the UK taking the biggest decision it has faced in nearly half a century, there is virtually no discussion by the ‘major’ parties – Labour and Conservative – about the damage Brexit will inflict: how much poorer will it make us, how many people’s rights will be destroyed, how badly will public services be damaged, how much weaker will it make the UK, indeed, will the UK survive it? And the media also largely ignore these questions. No wonder the whole thing seems like an exercise in self-deception.

If you don’t care about the above questions. Fine. Sleepwalk into Brexit. If you do, you’d better start thinking about how you stop it. This election perhaps presents the best chance so far, but also probably, the last.  

Brexitwatch: tell Labour MPs not to back Boris Johnson

Boris Johnson needs the backing of Labour MPs to get his 'deal', which will cost the UK even more than Theresa May's deal, through parliament, and there are disturbing signs that some of them are going to fall for it.

Potential defectors to Labour-for-Johnson include Jim Fitzpatrick, Caroline Flint, John Mann, Ruth Smeeth, Sarah Champion, Ronnie Campbell, Melanie Onn, Sir Keith Barron, Dan Jarvis, Gloria di Piero, Yvonne Forvague, Stephen Kinnock, Emma Lewell-Buck, Justin Madders, Grahame Morris, Stephanie Peacock, Lucy Powell, Laura Smith and Gareth Snell.

Write to them NOW to urge them not to take this foolish course of action. You can find their email addresses on the UK parliament website. This is the email I have sent them:

Boris Johnson's 'deal' will make all your constituents poorer (unless you've got a few hedge fund managers who will do very nicely out of impoverishing the rest of us). It will make their public services worse. It will probably break-up the UK, it will certainly make the country weaker and less influential, and if it goes through, it will save the skin of the worst Prime Minister and the most right-wing government in my (rather long) life. Do you really want to be remembered for supporting it?

And do you want to ensure Labour is consigned to the political wilderness as you alienate millions of Labour voters who are predominantly remainers - even in your constituency? 

No Labour MP should be backing Johnson's fake deal. It is a betrayal of everything Labour is supposed to stand for. It is also ludicrous that MPs should be expected to approve a 500 page document that has only just been handed to them but that will determine the future of our country for decades to come. There must be a proper opportunity to scrutinise it. All responsible MPs need to back the Letwin amendment.

If Labour MPs help to pass this dreadful withdrawal agreement, I will never vote Labour again, and will do everything I can to ensure its defeat in all future elections. We're not going away.

Yours sincerely,

Brexitwatch: the speech he never made

It is almost three years since the Brexit referendum. The man who called it, then Prime Minister David Cameron, promised that whatever the result, he would stay on as PM, but he broke that promise, resigning within hours. Just imagine if he had kept it. How much heartache and division, how many job losses he could have spared us from, and how much money he could have saved us.

All he needed to do was make this speech:

'Good morning. I am surprised and disappointed at the result of the referendum, but I promised that whatever the result I would stay on as your prime minister, and I will keep that promise.

I congratulate the Leave Campaign on their victory. Those who campaigned for the UK to leave the EU must clearly have had a credible plan for how this could be achieved without damaging our country, because without such a plan, no responsible politician could have advocated such a course of action.

So I am convening all those MPs who campaigned for Leave into a grand committee to come to an agreement on what they suggest as the way forward. Their plan will then be put to parliament as a whole.

In the meantime, there are many other tasks that our country requires its prime minister to perform in many other fields of policy, and I am now going back into 10 Downing Street to carry on with that work. Thank you.'

Would that really have been so hard?

Brexitwatch: BBC fails to address my complaint

In my post for April 19, I put up the letter I sent to the BBC complaining about its failure to challenge the constant lies trotted out by pro-Brexit speakers. I particulary wanted to know why BBC interviewers never ask:

1. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum that was won by lying, cheating and criminality?

2. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum in which voters were promised a Brexit that is not being and cannot be delivered?

3. Why are we pretending we have to obey the result of a referendum that was explicitly non-binding and advisory?

I received a reply which did not address any of these points: 

Dear Mr Withington

Thank you for contacting the BBC.

I understand you feel BBC News has shown a consistent bias in favour of Brexit and failed to properly question the assertions of those who are in favour of Brexit.

Naturally we regret when any member of our audience is unhappy with any aspect of what we do. We have received a wide range of feedback about our coverage of this story across our news programmes and bulletins. Keeping in mind pressures on licence fee resources, this response seeks to address the key points raised. That said, we apologise in advance if your complaint has not been specifically addressed here.

We aim to cover the ongoing Brexit negotiations with due impartiality. This means we carry a wide range of views about the European Union from across the political spectrum on our output.

We approach the story with the required level of impartiality, with input from various commentators and experts. 'Feedback' on BBC Radio 4 has addressed the issue of complaints about how we cover the story. Our Chief Political Adviser and the controller of the BBC's daily news programming joined Today presenter Nick Robinson, to discuss the common complaints from all sides. You may be interested in the sections at 3mins and 13mins especially:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b09z688x

As with any story we cover, BBC News does not have an opinion on the European Union, or on the UK’s position within it. Instead we try to explain the different and sometimes complex issues affecting our audience during Brexit. Our aim is to give them the information they need in order to follow the process clearly.

We appreciate your concerns and hope this helps to explain how we approach our reporting of this subject. Nonetheless, I understand this is something you feel strongly about and I’ve included your points on our audience feedback report that is sent to senior management and programme makers each morning and ensures that your complaint has been seen by the right people quickly. This helps inform their decisions about current and future output.

We appreciate you taking the time to register your views on this matter as it is greatly helpful in informing future decisions at the BBC.

Thanks again for getting in touch.

Kind regards

John Hamill

BBC Complaints Team

I have now complained about this response as follows:

I made a very specific complaint about how interviews with Brexit supporters are conducted on BBC programmes, and about how interviewers appear to constantly suppress crucial facts. I asked you whether this was because they were ignorant or because they were instructed not to raise certain issues inconvenient for the Brexit case. I also asked you if there was an instruction, from whom did it come.

You did not address any of these points, and instead delivered a standard, generic response claiming: 'we try to be fair'. The key points are below. I would be grateful if this time you address them.

Day after day, Brexit supporters are allowed to spout that the UK has to leave the EU because 'people voted for it'. (Most of them have by now given up any pretence that Brexit has any benefits.)

I used to work for the BBC as well as other broadcasting organisations, and I would have been asking these interviewees:

1. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum that was won by lying, cheating and criminality?

2. Why should we have to obey the result of a referendum in which voters were promised a Brexit that is not being and cannot be delivered?

3. Why are we pretending we have to obey the result of a referendum that was explicitly non-binding and advisory?

I have heard many, many Brexiters being interviewed on your programmes, but I have NEVER heard one of your interviewers putting these points. Why is that? Is it because they are ignorant of the facts or is it because an edict has come from on high forbidding them from raising these inconvenient facts. If it is the latter, from whom does it come?

Brexitwatch: working together to beat Brexit - a disappointing response from the Greens

Last week I wrote to the three main pro-Remain parties in England: the LibDems, Greens and Independent Group to ask how they would be co-operating in the local and European elections (see my post of April 12).

The only response I've had so far has been from the Greens. It was disappointing (and suggested a lack of understanding of how the voting system works): 

Hi John, 

Thank you for getting in touch. 

We released this statement on the matter yesterday: 

"The Green Party has no plans to field joint ‘remain’ lists in the upcoming European Elections. The Green Party has a long and proud history within the European Parliament - from being a strong and unwavering voice for Remain, to fighting climate change and standing up for workers’ rights. 

"The European Parliament election is conducted by proportional representation, which means every vote counts and every vote can make a difference. In the last European Elections the Green Party came ahead of the Liberal Democrats, with three MEPs elected. We would also resist any calls for us to stand alongside parties with whom we have fundamental ideological differences on austerity, economic policy and beyond." 

Kind regards, 
Culann 
Membership Team 
Green Party of England and Wales 

I have replied to the Green MP Caroline Lucas  caroline.lucas.mp@parliament.uk and to the party's leadership - leader@greenparty.org.uk

Dear Caroline Lucas & Green Party,

I am bitterly disappointed by the reply I have received to my question about how pro-Remain parties are going to co-operate in the local and European elections. 

You do not even mention the local elections, and your reply on the European elections reflects a tribalism that would fit perfectly in the Tory and Labour parties. It also suggests an ignorance of how the electoral system in the Euro elections works. Except in N Ireland, it is not a properly proportional system. A threshold has to be passed before a party can get any MEPs. The more pro-Remain parties fight each other, the fewer pro-Remain MEPs there will be.

If the election is handed to Nigel Farage or the Tory party, it will be a terrible blow for the Remain cause, and anyone in the pro-Remain parties who helps facilitate it will not be forgiven.

Please thing again.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: let's get pro-Remain parties to work together

If we're going to stop Brexit, it's really important that pro-Remain parties do very well in the local elections on May 2, and the European elections on May 23 (assuming they happen), so I've written to the LibDems, the Independent Group and the Greens to ask them what they're doing to work together.

Here's what I sent to the Independent Group:

It is very important that pro-Remain candidates do very well in the local elections and the European elections (assuming they take place).  So I would like to know what you are doing to co-operate with other pro-EU parties such as the LibDems, the Greens, the SNP etc. I am writing to the other parties asking the same question.

Brexitwatch: write to the speaker to stop May putting her disastrous 'deal' again

One of the few parliamentarians to emerge with real credit from the Brexit fiasco so far is the Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow. Last week he courageously ruled against Theresa May bringing her dreadful blindfold Brexit 'deal' back before MPs for a third time.

But May, who plainly has no respect for democracy, is just waiting for the chance to do exactly that. Allowing her to keep putting such a deeply unpopular plan until she gets the answer she wants is plainly unacceptable and makes parliament a laughing stock. So join me in writing to the Speaker again, asking him to stand firm. This is what I have sent:

Dear Mr Speaker,

Thank you for all you have done to fight for our democracy against a dangerously dictatorial prime minister and government.

I hear disturbing rumours that she is planning to bring her totally discredited blindfold Brexit 'deal' back to parliament. I trust you will not allow it to be put before MPs again without substantial and significant changes.

This browbeating and bullying of parliament while she denies the people the chance to change their minds is utterly unacceptable.

Please help us again.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington 

Brexitwatch: MPs determine our fate. Write to yours

It's great that two million marched in London and that nearly five million have signed the petition to revoke Article 50, but don't forget that MPs have already ignored another huge march for a 'People's Vote' on the Brexit terms and the four million plus people who signed a petition for a second referendum.

I have always believed that Brexit will be defeated only when MPs begin to think supporting it will damage their careers. So if your MP has not done everything in his/her power to fight Brexit so far, write to them NOW and say that if the UK leaves the EU you will hold them and their party responsible, and you will work to ensure their defeat at all future elections. If they are entrenched Brexiters, write anyway. They can still count.

My MP happens to be Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer, and this is what I have written to him: 

Dear Sir Keir,

I was bitterly disappointed to see the Labour Party trying to sabotage the People's Vote march. This is deeply foolish as well as duplicitous. As for hearing Caroline Flint singing the praises of Theresa May's blind Brexit when even Nigel Farage admits it is worse than staying in the EU, words fail me.

If we now leave the EU, I will not forgive Labour.

There is no longer any justification for Brexit:

1. Any Brexit will damage the UK and particularly the people Labour is supposed to care most about.

2. The referendum result is null and void as it was won by lies, cheating and criminality. (I am bitterly disappointed that Labour has tried to sweep this under the carpet - an act of foolishness and cowardice that will haunt the party for a very long time.)

3. The Brexit that was promised is not being and cannot be delivered, and there is no mandate for either of the available Brexits - Theresa May's blind Brexit or 'no deal'.

Labour's half-hearted opposition to the right wing Brexit coup has been a dreadful stain on the party's reputation, and if we are now dragged out of the EU, I will regard Labour as being as much to blame as the Tories. I trust you will now do whatever is necessary to stop it.

If we do leave, I will not forget, and I will do everything I can to help defeat Labour in all subsequent elections.

There is still time to do the right thing, but it is fast running out.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: if Jeremy Corbyn was Noah.....

Thanks to the New European for publishing my letter.

And sign the petition to revoke Article 50 and stop the whole sorry Brexit saga. A million signatures in 24 hours and counting - fast https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584

Brexitwatch: Tell her again! No to Theresa May's blind Brexit, and tell your MP again

Write to you MP and tell them to tell her again. No to Theresa May's blindfold Brexit. My MP is Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer:

Dear Sir Keir,

It will take a long time, maybe forever, for Labour to live down the image that tells us everything. The party sits idly by, too cowardly to take a view, so ensuring that the best opportunity so far for ordinary folk like us to be given a vote on our future is lost. Brexit is the biggest crisis this country has faced in my lifetime, but time and time again, Labour fails those who depend on it. As for the 17 of your UKIP 5th columnists who voted with Theresa May, what action will be taken against them? None at all, I suppose, as usual.

And now, emboldened by the leadership's spineless response, are those same Labour Kippers, plus maybe a few others, going to ensure that Theresa May's disastrous Tory blindfold Brexit gets through at the third time of asking, while we the great unwashed are told that we must never be allowed to change our minds?

Labour needs to swing wholeheartedly behind stopping Brexit and to expel the UKIP 5th columnists. This may be painful for a time, but it will give the party the chance of having a future. If you go on colluding with the Far Right Brexit project, you will never be forgiven.

Here's an alternative to Labour's hopeless prevarication and obfuscation. Why not now immediately revoke Article 50 because nothing sensible can be achieved by Theresa May's foolishly self-imposed deadline of March 29? Parliament should then set up a grand committee of all MPs who support Brexit. (This might simply be self-selected or it might be limited to those MPs who have spoken in the Commons in favour of it.)

That committee would then be given the task of deciding what the Brexiters want, and devising a plan to be put to parliament. Once MPs had agreed the plan was credible, and had a good chance of being accepted by the EU, it would then be put to the government. Parliament, hopefully, would also consider it against other criteria such as, for example, how much damage it would do to our country.

The government would then consider the proposals, and report to parliament on its suggestion as to how to proceed.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: write to the Speaker to stop Theresa May forcing through her blind Brexit

Theresa May's disastrous blindfold Brexit has twice been overwhelmingly rejected by MPs, but she's planning to bring it back a third or even a fourth and a fifth time. Surely that's outrageous especially when she denies the British people a second vote after a very close, highly dubious referendum? Shouldn't there be a law against it?

Well, there is. According to House of Commons' rules, once MPs have rejected something, it should not be put again during that session of parliament https://news.sky.com/story/an-ancient-rule-means-bercow-could-take-drastic-action-on-brexit-11664555

So the Speaker, John Bercow, could rule it out. He has already shown himself a courageous defender of democracy, and I have written to him again to ask him to save us from having a Brexit no one wants foisted on us by the increasingly dictatorial Theresa May. If you agree with me, please write to him too:

Dear Mr Speaker,

I have already thanked you for your sterling work defending the rights of parliament against an executive that seems to have been driven mad by Brexit, but I am now very disturbed at actions by the prime minister that seem calculated to bring parliament into disrepute.

Obviously you know far more about this than I do, but I had understood that if a measure was rejected by parliament, a government was not allowed to put it to MPs again in that parliamentary session. Theresa May has already had two goes with her blindfold Brexit, and MPs have overwhelmingly rejected it twice, but she appears to be determined to try a third, and even a fourth or fifth time. Surely this should not be allowed, especially when Mrs May has decreed that voters should never be allowed to change their minds about Brexit!

Even worse, she seems to be using taxpayers' money to bribe Labour and DUP MPs to support her. In addition to the damning reaction of MPs, it seems clear from polling evidence that her 'deal' is also extraordinarily unpopular in the country with both Leave and Remain voters. So if by some chicanery, she does manage to force it through, far from 'healing divisions' in the UK, it is likely to only make people more angry than ever, and that anger will probably be directed against a parliament that is behaving in a way most people cannot understand.

Please help us.

Yours sincerely,

John Withington

Brexitwatch: Theresa May's blindfold Brexit breaks a key promise

By next week, perhaps sooner, Theresa May will have made another attempt to steamroller her blindfold Brexit through parliament. Although it was heavily defeated last time, MPs, unlike the British people, are to be given a chance to change their minds.  

I fear it may get through as the all-mouth-and-no-trousers Tory Brexit fanatics of the  laughingly named 'European Research Group' (found out where Calais is yet, lads?) cave in and join in an unholy alliance with Labour's UKIP tendency - MPs like Kate Hoey, Caroline Flint, Sir Keith Barron, Dennis Skinner and Graham Stringer - who usually betray their party on Brexit issues and support Theresa May.

If the blindfold Brexit does go through, it breaks an undertaking given on a number of occasions by Theresa May who promised MPs they would have 'sufficient detail about all aspects of the future relationship' with the EU BEFORE they would have to decide whether it was a good idea to leave.

In fact, MPs will have no idea about our future relationship when they vote. Is it going to be the as-distant-as-possible one favoured by the Brexit fanatics? Official analysis - from a pro-Brexit government, remember - says such a deal sometimes refered to as 'Canada-style' and sometimes favoured by the ERG, would make us 6.7% poorer than staying in the EU over the next 15 years, and it doesn't solve the Irish border problem. Even the least damaging Brexit - staying in the single market and the customs union - sees us 1.4% poorer. 

A no-deal Brexit would, of course, be a disaster - leaving us an unsustainable 10.7% worse off. No wonder Theresa May admits it might mean martial law. If MPs have any concept of their duty to our country, they will refuse to back any Brexit until they know exactly what the government is trying to achieve.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/nov/28/economic-forecasts-strike-blow-to-theresa-mays-brexit-deal

Brexitwatch: stop the 'no deal' madness. Write to your MP

So now it seems a no deal Brexit will mean not just food and medicine shortages, but also possibly martial law. It is time to stop the madness. Write to your MP NOW and get them to back Yvette Cooper's amendment to rule out no deal (It will be voted on on Tuesday 29 January.) This is what I have sent to mine who happens to be Labour's Brexit spokesperson, Sir Keir Starmer.

Dear Sir Keir,

So now a 'no deal' Brexit will mean not only food and medicine shortages but also possible martial law. The Brexit foolishness has now escalated to insanity. MPs can stop the madness by supporting Yvette Cooper's amendment, and I trust that you and all Labour MPs will be voting for it. Even if you're a Brexiter, there can be no excuse for inflicting no deal on the country.

I trust Labout will also be voting against Theresa May's blind Brexit when it resurfaces - tell her again! And I trust that Labour will also oppose the delusional Tory amendment that presumes to order the EU to get rid of the Irish backstop.

I am still waiting for action to be taken against Kate Hoey and the rest of the UKIP fifth column in Labour's ranks. When Owen Smith was thought to have sounded too enthusiastic about a People's Vote, Jeremy Corbyn sacked him in short order. What picture do you think it paints of Labour when Hoey and the Brexit fanatics are allowed to defy party policy time and time again with impunity?

Yours sincerely,

John Withington