Second Brexit Referendum

brexit.jpg

Theresa May rubbished calls for a second Brexit election as absolutely ridiculous, and during a feisty Prime Minister’s Questions, the leader encountered additional criticism for her planned Withdrawal Agreement.

Give us.png

Recent polls reveal a large preponderance of people would like no Brexit at all, and the will of the people can change, the will of the people has changed. The way forward is a People’s Vote or does Theresa May believe that democracy ceased on the 23 June 2016?

Will Theresa May, therefore, think the way ahead is one, a second election? But Theresa May maintained democracy had already spoken, and she stated that claim in relation to democracy was completely ludicrous, and that parliament gave the people the freedom to decide whether to remain in the EU or leave the EU.

Theresa May stated that it was a glorious lesson in democracy in this country and she thought that it gave her parliament an education and that we should ensure we leave the EU as the people voted for.

The Prime Minister had earlier warned there could be no Brexit at all if her deal is defeated during the furious PMQs clash. Theresa May reiterated the desperate warning as her 585-page departure agreement was attached to her face by Jeremy Corbyn and her own MPs.

brexit-referendum-uk-1468255044bIX.jpg

Theresa May’s sinking career depends largely on Brexit now, and she’s desperate to roll it out at any price, although with her comfortable status she will be fine in every situation, just like the cowardly David Cameron.

We’re in a democratic crisis, and it won’t be until next year when Theresa May deceives the people into thinking that everything that’s happened wasn’t her blunder, but it’s all propaganda, manipulated votes and canned deceptions.

The difficulty is even though many people voted out, out to where? What will be the terms? And in what way will these new, so far hypothetical terms be better than the terms we already enjoy?

Well, the fact is, none of us knows! But we’re assuming that somebody does, otherwise, we’re going to be up the creek without a paddle, and Theresa May will tell you anything to try and intimidate people into believing her nonsense deal. As she said, we were unquestionably coming out, now she’s telling us that a no Brexit deal is an alternative.

If her mouth is moving, take it with a pinch of salt, and like anybody else, if they believe they’re going to fail they’ll say anything to reinforce their argument, but for the increasing abundance of people in the United Kingdom asking for a second vote to reverse Brexit, be cautious what you wish for.

Once thought as a remote possibility, support has increased for a second vote over recent months, as opinion polls reveal a tiny but significant uptick in cynicism circling the UK’s decision to leave the European Union.

With Prime Minister Theresa May facing an upward struggle to strike a Brexit agreement that can gain majority support in the UK parliament, campaigners want a secondary election to be held if MPs reject whatever agreement she strikes with Brussels, and the opposition Labour Party has stated it would support such an option if Theresa May doesn’t call an election first.

These votes are crazy, and by the way, the 40 per cent of remain voters “don’t know” should set alarm bells clanging in the minds of pollsters.

If Britain and the EU can’t come to an arrangement or the settlement reached is declined by Parliament or EU member nations, food and other goods will be governed to tariffs and controls when moving between Britain and the EU, leading to huge setbacks in the short term, much less overall business with the EU and significant disturbance to businesses like farming and manufacturing that rely on vital commerce with the EU, and there will be new customs restraints at the Irish border, and imports of medication and food from the EU could be delayed, and the government would need to make contingency arrangements with the EU and America to allow airline flights to continue.

Advertisements

Preparing For The Challenge

theresa-may-an103106230epa05433683.jpg

Theresa May is mounting a tour of the United Kingdom and planning to challenge Jeremy Corbyn to a live TV debate on Brexit, and if agreed the show could happen on Sunday 9 December, days before the Commons vote.

The reports come despite chicken Mrs May ducking calls for TV debates during last year’s general election. At the time she claimed that she didn’t think people got much out of seeing politicians having a go at each other and stated that Jeremy Corbyn should be paying a little more thought and think more about Brexit negotiations.

gettyimages-1044237538.jpg

But ‪a Labour Party spokesperson stated that Jeremy Corbyn would relish a head to head debate with Theresa May and her botched Brexit deal and the fate of the nation, and No 10 could not directly be reached for comment.

Brexit discussions are supposed to be concluded, and Jeremy Corbyn has had no input. If Theresa May had wanted opinions on Brexit from Jeremy Corbyn she surely would have taken them on board in the beginning, and if the less than trusted Prime Minister wants a televised confrontation, then it can only be an endeavour to undermine Jeremy Corbyn in some way, maybe by attempting to portray him as being opposed to Brexit, and if that’s the case she may as well be discrediting all those people that opted to stay in.

She will presumably work with a script and will have hints and answers provided through an earpiece, and the entire thing is destined to be a pretence, just as her proposed Brexit deals are.

Theresa May seems to be animated by her fighting spirit to ward off the backstabbers and plotters within her own party, but a challenge with the leader of the opposition should test her precarious strength, and hopefully, Jeremy Corbyn will eat her alive and then spit her out.

The one thing that Jeremy Corbyn shines in is open discussion and speech, and the one thing that Theresa May can’t do is open debate. How long will it take before she goes on about what Labour did in the 1970s, and how long will it be before she loses her rag, once pressed? And if this is meant to be a charm offensive, it will certainly fail.

Theresa May is now regarded as so incompetent, she couldn’t call a pet dog to heel, and she’s the bane of the United Kingdom, and she should be made to resign.

She will be like the lamb to the slaughter unless it’s scripted, but then I suppose she’s so desperate now that she has to do something, but the most important thing that we can do now in this country is to force politicians out if they’re taking payments for working corporations over the people of the country, this degradation is destroying the United Kingdom and must go.

Most of the people of the United Kingdom are fed up with politicians lining their own pockets at the detriment of the people living in it.

However, with this debate, Jeremy Corbyn will now have to tell us what he actually thinks, there will be no more sitting on the fence, and if nothing else, it should be a laugh.

We have listened to Theresa May’s lies and now see them as being an entire capitulation and deception of this nation, now it’s time to hear what Jeremy Corbyn really thinks.

Theresa May and the Conservatives have failed and failed hard but make no mistake, so have Labour, and if we vote for them they will do it again. To fix our society we must fix the entire political system and make it functional, and we certainly won’t get a reliable government by voting for corrupted self-serving politicians.

It doesn’t matter who you vote for now in the United Kingdom, and irrespective of who you do vote for, what you actually get is someone who is going to rip you off, on the make for themselves off people who did actually work in a real job for 50 years and are now living on welfare.

But why does it have to be Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn having this debate? Just because their parties are the two largest doesn’t mean they will be in the next general election, what about all the other parties, don’t they get to have a say?

This is the nation that developed industry and now has none, this is the nation that helped win two world wars, and children are leaving school now with more prospect of a knighthood than a decent job, paying decent wages. Our NHS was once the best in the world, and now it’s like the third world, and now all our best nurses and doctors now call Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Europe home, but we do have lots of food banks, soup kitchens and exploding prisons.

And when we’re free from the EU we will be able to barter with Bangladesh, Upper Volta and Africa, doing what Napoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler all failed to do, destroy it, and if you hate Great Britain, vote Tory!

But then anyone who puts on a khaki uniform in the mistaken notion that he’s defending his country is seriously misled because every war is based on lies, and the only people who conquer are the bankers.

emmanuel-macron.jpg

Emmanuel Macron has already stated he will bind Britain to the Customs Union indefinitely until we agree on full access to British waters, and Theresa May is finished as Prime Minister and it’s the EU that will kill her off once they have ceased using her to get what they want.

Theresa May has lost what little supporters she had, but then the Tories only look after the Tories, all of us other followers are seemingly irrelevant, our country is finished, and the only reason she wants this debate is to seek and gain a little more public support, for a deal that isn’t worth the paper it’s written on, and it’s a disaster whichever way you look at it.

And of course, Theresa May will attempt to turn this around and condemn Labour for her woes, but this is her mess, induced by her party, she can’t downshift the culpability and waggle her finger.

Review Disabled Children’s Support

Image

Ministers are being encouraged to reconsider care provided for children with disabilities following an investigation into the adequacy of support for families.

The conclusions were heart rending and disturbing and, indicated that some families were unable to bear the expense of basic essentials to live a dignified life.

A study, carried out by the University of Central Lancaster (UClan) for the children’s commissioner, found evidence that poverty signified that some disabled children were not living lives that converged with international human rights standards.

This is about the voiceless and the helpless, as well as making ends meet and, some of these stories that we’re informed about are extremely touching and very distressing.

Money matters are extremely real and very demanding and,  parents are equally saying they have little or no say in the methods that services are organised and provided, from transport to access to youth, or play or leisure which is properly modified for one’s disability.

The research was founded on talks and group discussions with 78 disabled children and young people and 17 parents.  It was co led by a group of 11 disabled children and young people working with the university.

A spokesman for the Department of Work and Pensions rebuffed some of the conclusions.

Image

“In fact, independent reports show how we are world leaders in support for disabled people with the UK’s spending on disability-related benefits a fifth higher than the EU average.

“The UK is also acknowledged as a world leader in supporting independent living for disabled people, having the best overall rating of 55 countries.

“We continue to spend around £50bn a year on disabled people and their services and our reforms will make sure the billions spent give more targeted support to those who need it most.”

Nonetheless, some of those intimate stories coloured a much different picture and, those officials who have no doubt composed that statement should go and meet some of those young people, who will tell them the true story of living with a disability on an extremely low income.

There is a mum cited in the survey, who because her child required a modified home, incorporating a multi sensory setting, was coerced to make sure that was available, she will be paying for it until November 2022.

There was as well a young woman going through everything that adolescence carries with it, who needs incontinence pads.  Benefits pay for four a day; she needs 10.  That is not human respect and, it’s not human rights either.

In spite of the condemnation, researchers found numerous examples of disabled children being given good care and services which they said give a demonstration on how low income doesn’t have to be an obstacle.

Nonetheless, proof was as well established of insufficient services, compounding the difficulties of some low income families and, even though families with disabled children often have rights to welfare payments and practical support, their basic incomes frequently don’t deal with the additional costs of raising and caring for a disabled child.

The team analysed three United Nations treaty documents: the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Convention on Persons with Disabilities and the International Covenant on Economic and Social Rights.

Between them these treaties state an individuals’ rights to food, clothes and heating, to live on one’s own, to be able to settle on where to live, to live in their local communities and, to the provisions and amenities they need to be able to do that.

It was found that the lives lived by some disabled children and young people did not fulfil these fundamental rights.  There were accounts of some disabled children, young people and their parents not being able to heat their homes properly, or pay for sufficient clothing or food.

Some were not notified or involved in decisions about changes to where they lived.  Some experienced delays in alterations being made to their homes and, some didn’t have enough room nor support for independent living.

It appears that because the government has no emotional bond to these people they can then be narrow-minded in the way that they look at the disabled.

If they were more unprejudiced with their views, their response with regard to the disabled might be different and, their reaction towards them would be looked at to a larger degree, but there’s no support, plainly because they don’t have to raise them, consequently it’s easier to throw them to one side like a commodity.

As well it’s not just the young that need assistance, it’s adults similarly, because they’re the selfsame, they’re no different.  Their individuality might be somewhat different, but at the end of the day, they’re as well disabled and need support.

They’re as well unable to pay for basic essentials for a dignified life, or is it because they’re adults that they no longer need that support, because it appears that after a certain age people that are adults and disabled no longer appear to be a viable commodity.

Nonetheless, if we’re no longer viable, then as far as the government are interested we’re no longer worth retaining and, as a result, of no real significance.

If we can’t labour and, we’re not making money for them, then they may as well pull the plug on us and, terminate us, since the only reason we’re here in the first place is so that the government can make us into serfs, but what they fail to remember, if there were no slaves, there would be no government!

When people start believing that they need us more than we need them, then maybe it may be better understood that this country doesn’t need to run with a government, it can stand on its own two feet because WE ARE the spine of this government, the government ARE NOT the spine of us!