Defend our democracy?

In response to the queen and Boris Johnson’s disreputable prorogation of parliament on August 28th to enable a disastrous cliff-fall no deal Brexit (that financially suits both of them) hundreds of thousands of people picketed in city and town centres around Britain to protest against manipulation of parliamentary procedure.  

Eton boy bows to unelected head of state

The theme of the pickets was ‘defend our democracy.’  What democracy needs to be defended?  Is there democracy in Britain?  

Britain has an unelected head of state protected by armed soldiers at her residences, unelected House of Lords, unelected Supreme Court that can override government decisions, a police force that can enter parliament without invitation and restrict MPs’ movements within, a court system that allows private businesses to sue councils if councillors make decisions favouring the public rather than the corporate world and a parliamentary system that allows corrupt MPs to change party membership without calling by-elections.

Democracy in Britain is a few crumbs.  It is a little con trick to dissuade people from revolutionary thoughts.  It is a device to distract and use up time and energy of people who might be inclined to seek change.  The pickets against the queen and Johnson’s malpractice were sincere but what they were asking to be defended is the cause of the problem.  The very undemocratic system of governance in Britain allowed the prorogation and, thus, allows a descent to no deal Brexit that will destroy society.

A hereditary monarch and an Etonian conspired to manipulate parliamentary procedure without breaking the rules or the law; that doesn’t mean their actions cannot be opposed or challenged but any legal challenges will probably fail.  Another option available to opponents of the queen and Johnson would to be as underhand and as sneaky as they were and there are characters among their opponents who have the wherewithal to do that but, if successful, that wouldn’t be a defence of democracy.

To defend democracy there first needs to exist democracy.  It is heartwarming that so many people picketed against the monarch and the government’s trickery but, essentially, the protests were against the respective dishonesty of a nurtured Etonian and a veteran venal monarch.  If British democracy is reliant on honesty of charlatans like that pair then it isn’t worth defending.  The real protest should be to eradicate what masquerades as democracy.

Related blogs
Proroguing parliament: Queen as guilty as Johnson
Boris Johnson: Etonian conman

Defend our democracy?

Proroguing parliament: Queen as guilty as Johnson

UPDATE: 3pm, August 28th: Queen agreed to prorogation of parliament.

Cowardly, venal, Etonian swindler Boris Johnson stated his intent to prorogue parliament this week (August 28th) in order to enable no deal Brexit to suit salivating criminals and disaster capitalists waiting to grab public services, buildings and land from the British people in a once-in-a-lifetime giveaway. 

The end of the NHS, workers’ rights, legal rights, human rights, etc. will be consequences of Johnson’s actions.  The end of society and the effective end of Britain as a country is the aim of the beneficiaries of a no deal Brexit.  They want to turn Britain into private property, owned by offshore tax dodgers, where everyone rents their lives from cradle to grave.

To prorogue, Johnson will require a nod of approval from the queen.  He will get that nod, willingly.  The queen and her mafia family couldn’t give a swan’s anus about Britain.  For them, it is a source of income via civil list, land “ownership” and various disreputable investments.  When international markets crashed a decade ago, the queen made a packet.  Chaos suits the wealthiest.

Pathetic commentators are bleating about how “it’s a difficult position for the monarch” but such comments are deliberate misrepresentation.  The queen will be a keen co-conspirator and an ally to Johnson’s suspension of democracy.  Her nod of approval will be accompanied by a high five and a knowing laugh.


Related blog
Boris Johnson: Etonian conman

Proroguing parliament: Queen as guilty as Johnson

Boris Johnson: Etonian conman

Johnson’s public persona has reduced to incoherent ejaculations of meaningless faux-optimism about no deal Brexit and repetitive PR-team phrases.  He cannot justify his commitment to a cliff-fall no deal Brexit and he has neither the knowledge of nor the intelligence to understand the details of what will happen if Britain crashes out of EU on October 31st (2019).

Etonian bluster is all he has.  That is all he has ever had.  It is deliberate.  His behaviour is a tactic.  It is one of the few skills he learnt at the Eton machine.  He was taught that the jolly posh bloke who seeks to simplify the message will be applauded obsequiously by similarly educated media hacks.  The swiftness with which journalists and broadcasters fell into line was as nauseating as it was predictable.  ITV’s Paul Brand danced with joy at Johnson’s conman’s charm in contrast to his report on a secret camera investigation into Jeremy Corbyn using a lift.

Nothing about Johnson is sincere.  He was taught to be a puppet.  Eton’s main purpose is to produce focussed puppets who will accept any money offered to perform.  That is why it produced so many Hollywood actors.  Johnson’s acts are as intentionally distracting from reality as those of fellow Etonians Damian Lewis and Benedict Cumberbatch.

There is insufficient discussion, debate or analysis by professional observers of Johnson and his cabinet of pleurisities and Brexit.  He is getting away with it.  He knows his persona and attitude will allow him to get away with it because he knows the professional hacks and commentariat will allow him to do so.

Meanwhile, Johnson and his decepticons, or their string operators at various hard-right economically libertarian think-tanks like Institute of Economic Affairs, Centre for Policy Studies and Tax-Payers’ Alliance, are arranging catastrophically destructive deals, via Trump and his cronies, with the lowest gutter-dwelling exploitative tax-avoiding businesses.  

For the people of Britain, the consequences of a Johnson-led no deal Brexit will be significantly worse than most people – opponents of it – predicted.  The gurning Etonian Prime Minister intends to give everything away, permanently.  The initial short, sharp shock of departure will be a mere tap compared to the carpet-bombing that will follow over months and years.

The basic consequences of Johnson’s handover of Britain will include

  • NHS sliced up and handed to made-up healthcare businesses as cash cows leading to multi-tier health service dependent on ability to pay
  • Police replaced by untrained, underpaid private security employed by made-up tax-haven based businesses like G4S
  • Disappearance of social care
  • Increase in prisons and prisoners; prisons will be staffed and administered by made-up businesses as cash cows: More prisoners = more profits
  • Removal of remaining access to legal aid
  • Removal of workers’ rights for pay, hours, holidays, sickness benefits, dismissal tribunals and health and safety
  • Closure of remaining public libraries and museums
  • Closure of public parks and handover to private tax haven based landowners
  • Removal of council home tenants from their homes and handover of properties to tax haven based property owners
  • State schools replaced by academies and free schools owned by tax haven based made-up businesses leading to reduction in quality of education
  • Removal of minimum wage
  • Increase in capability of wealthiest people to avoid paying any tax
  • New laws to prevent governments from cancelling or avoiding privatisation of vital public services
  • Welfare benefits replaced by loans
  • Steep rise in pension age
  • Military conscription alongside privatisation of armed forces
  • Variety of scams to reduce voting
  • Severe restrictions on protests, demonstrations and pickets
  • Criminalisation of strikes and other industrial action by workers
  • Cancellation of all renewable energy projects and concomitant increase in fracking regardless of environmental effects
  • Tax cuts for wealthiest alongside increases in VAT, council tax and national insurance contributions for those with least income
  • Withdrawal from all international human rights legislation and laws

However, all that the media offers in criticism are worries about lorry queues in Kent and quibbles about the veracity of Johnson’s claim about pork pies.  The pork pie lie by Johnson was a simple distraction.  It worked because he knew the media would happily choose to mock him for that little porky pie about porky pies as a means of dodging discussing the real consequences of a no deal Brexit.

Boris Johnson (left) and Donald Trump at G7 meeting

Johnson and his mob intend to give Britain away and then abscond.  They intend to turn Britain into private property of faceless tax haven based criminals where everybody living here is renting their lives, from cradle to grave.  The Tories’ aims are the wet dreams of the filth at the aforementioned right-wing think-tanks and their anonymous donors.  They will bring to an end Britain’s status as a country.  Johnson is the ultimate traitor and he learnt it all at Eton.

Related blogs
Tory privatisation
Disaster capitalists
Boris Johnson Prime Minister?
Tories to deny access to right to vote
Centre for Policy Studies
Institute of Economic Affairs
Tax-Payers’ Alliance

Boris Johnson: Etonian conman

A Koch and Bell story

This week has been a good week for ridding this mortal coil of filth.  First, the lesser of the two Koch brothers departed followed by eponymous co-founder of Bell Pottinger.  Good riddance to two opponents of humanity.

David Koch, alongside his (still living) brother Charles, followed a similar career path to Donald Trump: Inherited money and businesses without intelligence or work ethic to justify ownership and relied on others for work and relied on volume of wealth for success.  Nothing the Koch’s did businesswise was down to acumen or skill.

The Kochs’ greatest contributions to the fight against humanity were the huge payments they made to (mostly US) politicians to demand the right paths were taken on a variety of political issues, each (right) path designed to enhance the wealth of the wealthiest at the expense of the vast majority.  Well-paid instructions from Kochs to politicians included destruction of public healthcare, removal of workers’ rights, removal of health and safety regulations, removal of pollution regulations, removal of tenants’ rights, removal of access to justice, removal of tax obligations for the wealthiest and, increasingly over recent years, relentless attacks on any attempts to tackle man-made climate change.

There are very few people or businesses in the world who paid as much money as the Kochs did to politicians to ensure extreme exploitation remained the norm.  The only skill the Kochs displayed was their realisation that the structure and processes of US politics encouraged obsequious venality and they focussed their energies on feeding on that venality.

Tim Bell was co-founder of ‘reputation management’ firm Bell Pottinger.  For wealthy people, for business and for disreputable governments reputation management means lying, deflecting and conning and that was Bell Pottinger’s methodology.

In the cheque was large enough, Bell Pottinger worked for anyone, for any purpose and utilised any tactic regardless of the morality of client or task or of the legality of the tactics. 

It wrote speeches for mass state murderers to deflect attention from the crimes they committed, it produced fake videos for political propaganda including fake terrorism videos, it manipulated internet searches to ensure friendly articles for its clients were near the top of search results and it attacked any media outlet that dared to question its practices.

A video clip, recorded by uncover journalists, revealed Bell Pottinger’s practices, arrogance and immorality: Dark Arts

Eventually, Bell Pottinger collapsed in on itself when it took several steps too far in political manipulation in South Africa and it consequently went bankrupt.

Good riddance
Koch and Bell operated in different branches of exploitation, one used money for political influence and the other was paid to advise and assist political manipulation, but both shared many attributes: Utter indifference to humanity, to society, to community and to the planet; limitless venality; limitless desire for more money; self-nurtured arrogance and fake justification for their behaviour.

Their deaths led to a variety of comments, some supportive, some critical and some analytically cold.  It is worth noting who produced the rose-tinted analyses and who expressed feigndignation at displays of celebration of their departures.  

Celebration and associated polemics should accompany the deaths of two intrinsically vile opponents of humanity.  Neither deserved an iota of human response to his demise.  Their deaths are an opportunity to rip apart their philosophies and the mechanisms that they invented, used and abused.  Two are dead but the structure remains and their deaths can focus attention on what they did and how they were able to do it.

Koch and Bell, in happier times

feigndignation n. Fake indignation, used to alter the direction of an argument (c. David Whittam)

A Koch and Bell story

Independent MPs might stymie a vote of no confidence in the Tory government

Former Tory/Lib Dem coalition minister and current Lib Dem leader Jo Swinson refused to work with Jeremy Corbyn on preventing no deal Brexit.  Her reluctance to act against a calamitous cliff-fall Brexit was a consequence of her party’s opposition to Corbyn being Prime Minister, both temporarily and after a general election.

There exist others who share Lib Dems’ priority of stopping a successful vote of no confidence and consequential removal of the Tories as a means of stopping Corbyn even if the result of stymying the no confidence vote would be no deal Brexit.  These obstacles are some (not all) of the independent MPs.

Different types of independent MPs
There is one genuine independent MP who was elected as an independent MP – Sylvia Hermon.  Hermon supports remaining in the EU but is reluctant to support any vote that would elect Corbyn as leader of a temporary government.  

There are four Labour MPs who were suspended by their party – Kelvin Hopkins, Jared O’Mara and Chris Williamson.  Williamson is expected to support a vote of no confidence in the Tories.  O’Mara said he will stand down as an MP in September (prior to a general election); he is under investigation by police for alleged fraud.

Frank Field left Labour last year without calling a by-election because of differences over Brexit.  He formed a one-man party this month (August).

Stephen Lloyd left Liberal Democrats without calling a by-election.  He objected to his former party’s support for remain.

The other independent MPs were elected as members of either Labour or Tory in 2017 general election.  They chose to leave their respective parties and continue as MPs without calling by-elections.  They stole parliamentary seats from the parties for whom they were elected and, thus, they stole votes from voters in their constituencies.

Some of the last group formed a fake political party, Change UK, that swiftly disintegrated; two of them, Chukka Umunna (ex Labour) and Sarah Woollaston (ex Tory), moved to Liberal Democrats after Change UK. 

The obstacles
The remnants of Change UK, both those in its residue and its former members, and two other independent MPs are major obstacles to a successful vote of no confidence in the Tory government.  All would lose their stolen seats in a general election.  With the lost seats would go lost income and lost saleability to the buyers of MPs’ influence.  For each, a six-figure sum per annum would be the minimum reduction in income.  Loss of personal income is not their only motivation to not support a vote of no confidence in the Tories.  All fought against socialism persistently throughout their political careers.  Their fear of socialism is much greater than their opposition to no deal Brexit. 

Ex-Labour MPs who chose to leave to become independent MPs (as Change UK or otherwise) had not joined Labour, and later become MPs, to support Labour ideology or policy; they joined as career moves, to acquire steady income of an MP and to prostitute themselves to buyers of MPs’ opinions and decision-making capabilities.

MPs who chose to leave their parties and remain seated in parliament cannot be trusted.  They defecated in the faces of voters in their constituencies who voted for parties not for individuals’ careers and not for the financial interests of those individuals’ donors.  The MPs snubbed the democratic process by refusing to call by-elections.  They are thieves and cowards.  

Roll call of some likely disruptors of a vote of no confidence
Change UK, or whatever it is now called, has five MPs.  That is today’s total (August 26th) – the total could go up or down at any time.  The five are four former Labour MPs and one former Tory MP.

Mike Gapes occupies the constituency of Ilford South that he stole from Labour voters in February this year.  His reaction to Jeremy Corbyn’s proposal for a vote of no confidence in the Tory government followed by a temporary unity government led by Corbyn was a childish dishonest remark: “I’m sure Russia, Iran and Maduro in Venezuela will be looking forward to Prime Minister Corbyn.”

Chris Leslie occupies the constituency of Nottingham East that he stole from Labour voters in February this year.  He responded to Corbyn’s plan with false and offensive equivalence of Corbyn and Johnson.  I oppose a no-deal Brexit because it puts jobs at risks, devalues our currency, sees businesses leave the UK, divides society & undermines national security.  I oppose a hard left Government under Corbyn for the same reasons.”

Leslie said he wanted a temporary “unity” government but his opposition to Corbyn is so ingrained he does not want to support a vote of no confidence, citing a false consequence that such a vote could lead to no deal Brexit if Corbyn failed to find support for a unity government.  “Parliament must legislate to stop no-deal.  I don’t want a Johnson govt.  I’d rather a truly national unity administration.  But unless we can be totally certain of securing numbers for this, dissolving Parliament after 14 days hands Boris total power to crash out with no deal.”

The convoluted nature of Leslie’s contorted dishonest argument about vote support and whether no deal occurs was deliberate distraction and misdirection.  Leslie’s focus is to stop Corbyn being prime minister, as unity leader or after a general election.  If that means Leslie will aid no deal that that is what he will do.

Joan Ryan occupies the constituency of Enfield North that she stole from Labour voters in February this year.  She made clear that her opposition to Corbyn, even as a short-term leader, overrides her opposition, if it exists, to no deal Brexit.  “So many MPs have said Jeremy Corbyn is not fit to be PM & some of us have been willing to stand by that view.  I want to stop no deal.  I want to remain.  I don’t want Corbyn as PM.  He can stop no deal by backing someone acceptable to be interim PM.”

Ann Coffey occupies the constituency of Stockport that she stole from Labour voters in February this year.  She has not commented on Corbyn’s plan but she had proposed a motion of no confidence in Jeremy Corbyn as party leader in June 2016 when she was a Labour MP.

Anna Soubry occupies the constituency of Broxtowe that she stole from Tory voters in February this year.  She declared her opposition to a general election and described Corbyn’s plan for a general election to be a stunt.  “The preference for a General Election rather than an immediate People’s Vote leads me to conclude this is nothing more than a stunt.”

Soubry prefers a People’s Vote to avoid a Labour victory in a general election and to cling onto her stolen parliamentary seat and associated income.  “A Government of National Unity must have as its common purpose a determination to return Brexit to the British people.  It’s striking that Corbyn does not share that view instead he offers a General Election which will not settle the matter.”

She repeated the standard centrist trick that her reason for not supporting Corbyn is because he won’t get the support needed – from people like her.  “I have argued for a genuine Government of National Unity led by someone who commands respect and support not just in his or her own party but in all parties.  Jeremy Corbyn is not that person given he struggles to maintain the confidence of his own back benchers.”

Comically, she complained that Corbyn did not include the five remaining Change UK MPs as recipients of a letter asking for support for his plan.  “I am disappointed Jeremy Corbyn did not include me in his letter especially as there are five MP members of our party.”  (Change UK is currently polling at 0% in national election polls.)

The are four former members of Change UK – three former Labour MPs and one Tory.  They formed The Independents, a non-party party and added former Labour MP John Woodcock.

Gavin Shuker occupies the constituency of Luton South that he stole from Labour voters in February this year.  He repeated the twisted circular argument that Corbyn cannot get support for a vote of no confidence from people like Shuker because people like Shuker won’t support him and he clarified that he prefers no deal Brexit over support for Corbyn as temporary leader.  Unless Jeremy Corbyn is a very stupid man, he understands there is no majority in parliament for a government, in any circumstances, led by him.  Not for a minute, an hour, a day.  More cynical games from him.  Under another Labour figure, it’s possible.”

Shuker’s focus is not Brexit but destroying the leftward switch of Labour.  When he said “under another Labour figure” Shuker did not mean McDonnell, Abbott or Long-Bailey, he meant Cooper, Mann or Kinnock.  He will happily stand idly and watch the catastrophe of a crash out of the EU as a tactic to stop Corbyn and socialism.

His snarky comment that “Tory-led hard Brexit suits Corbyn best of all” was designed to denigrate Corbyn’s integrity.  

Luciana Berger occupies the constituency of Wavertree that she stole from Labour voters in February this year.  In July she said she “couldn’t be responsible for facilitating getting Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street.”

Heidi Allen occupies the constituency of South Cambridgeshire that she stole from Tory voters in February this year.  After leaving Change UK Allen created Unite To Remain supposedly as a tool to acquire parliamentary seats for remain-supporting parties in a general election but in its mission statement she said “if we continue to work along traditional party lines we will allow the ideological fringes of politics to win.”  That is, its objective is to stop Labour winning.

Unite To Remain wants Labour to not contest some seats, allegedly to help a pro-remain alliance.  “We would be happy to discuss this [no Green/Plaid  Cymru/Lib Dem candidates in some seats] with Labour if the starting point that they will consider not contesting every GB seat.”  Clearly, that is a ruse to reduce Labour’s seat numbers.

Angela Smith, the former Labour MP not the current Labour peer of the same, occupies the constituency of Penistone & Stocksbridge that she stole from Labour voters in February this year. 

John Woodcock occupies the constituency of Barrow and Furness that he stole from Labour voters in July last year when he resigned from Labour.  In January this year he failed to support a vote of no confidence in the Tory government.  

The other ex-Labour MP who left the party without calling a by-election, but has never been part of Change UK or part of The Independents, is Ian Austin.  Austin occupies the constituency of Dudley that he stole from Labour voters in February when he resigned from Labour.  He did not join Change UK because he does not support remaining in the EU.

In response to Corbyn’s attempt to stop a no deal Brexit Austin said “There is no chance of Corbyn finding a majority in Parliament.  The Labour Party has been poisoned by extremism and racism under his leadership.  He is utterly unfit to lead our country and completely incapable of resolving the Brexit issue.”

In July this year then Tory Prime Minister Theresa May gave Austin a job as a “trade envoy.”  He had no work experience that suggested he was capable of doing such a job.  The expenses-funded jollies for Austin were a little thank you for his assistance to the Tory government.

Democracy thief Ian Austin

A vote of no confidence in a government is an opportunity for elected representatives in parliament to remove a caustic government from power and call an election.

When voters voted Labour in 2017 general election they rightly expected that the MPs they elected would do everything they could to remove the Tories from power if an opportunity arose.  To refuse to take such an opportunity would be disgraceful and a declaration of war against democracy.

In nine constituencies, listed above, where tens of thousands of voters voted for nine Labour MPs there are nine non-Labour MPs who stole seats from Labour and defrauded the voters of their basic democratic right.  It was a failure of parliamentary process and rules that such assaults on democracy were allowed.  

If the nine fail to support a vote of no confidence in the Tory government then they are worse than the filth in the Tory party. 

Corrupt, criminal, cowardly opponents of democracy, their names and faces should not be forgotten.  

Top: Chris Leslie, Luciana Berger, Angela Smith; Middle: Gavin Shuker, Ann Coffey, John Woodcock, Ian Austin; Bottom: Joan Ryan, Mike Gapes

Related blogs
Democracy thieves
Ian Austin
John Woodcock

Independent MPs might stymie a vote of no confidence in the Tory government

Simple pictorial depiction of the cause of Amazonian fires

Tens of thousands of fires are raging throughout the Amazonian rain forest.   Although some fires occur every year the number of fires this year is a huge increase on previous years and most of the fires are close to areas of the rain forest that were previously cleared for cattle farms.

Below is a simple pictorial explanation of the flow of influence, coercion and money related to the fires.


Recommended reading
Manuella Libardi on Bolsonaro’s plans for rain forest
Lee Fang on US business ties to Brazilian politicians
Ryan Grim on Blackstone
Robert Mackey on Blackrock

Simple pictorial depiction of the cause of Amazonian fires

No deal Brexit plans: Don’t mention the death numbers (parody)

Large room at Chequers.  Prime Minister, members of his cabinet and advisers are sat or stood about the room.  Bored faces, tired eyes and wads of paper fill the room.  

The Prime Minister asks for quiet.

Johnson: Right.  Let’s be quick about this.  We’ve all got multiple expenses-funded homes to go to.  First up, that Yellowspanner leak has 

Javid, interrupting: Hammer

Johnson: What?

Javid: It’s Yellowhammer.

Johnson: Ah, yes.  Well, Yellowhammer gave the hacks in the press an opportunity to have meandering conversations about gradations of doomsday.  So, that’s a good distraction.

Cummings: Thank you, Prime Minister.

Johnson: Thank you Philip.

Cummings: Ha ha.  Yes.

Johnson: We’ve got nine weeks left before we’re out, then a week or so of destruction of society and annihilation of public infrastructure by copious use of “emergency laws” <laughs> and then we can all sod off never to be seen again.  I know it’s a bore and repetitive but let’s get through it.  There’s offshore gold at the end of the Brexit rainbow for all of us…….who are in this room. 

Westley: Yeah!

Johnson: Most of us in this room.  Kwasi, how did the TV interviews go?

Kwarteng: As the Queen’s minister and an old Etonian I sat, leant back ever so slightly to enable me to look down on the interviewer and I talked absolute balderdash.

Johnson and Rees-Mogg: <incoherent excited noises>

Kwarteng: As the Queen’s minister and an old Etonian I must say it irks me that some of those BBC types went to lesser schools like Malvern or Radley.

Johnson and Rees-Mogg: <incoherent disgusted noises>

Johnson: Thank you Kwasi.  Now, some good news.  We have devised a plan to avoid paying back all those National Insurance payments as pensions.  We’ve spent the money several times anyway.  The plan is

Patel: Hang ’em.

Johnson: What?  No, that’s not it.  <points> Jo, make yourself useful and jimmy open that coffin.

Jo Johnson opens a coffin with a crowbar.  Ashen-faced Iain Duncan-Smith emerges slowly.

Johnson: Hello there old boy.  I’ve told everyone that we have a marvellous idea to deal with all those pensioners wanting their money back to scrape a living on but I’d like to give you the honour of explaining it.

Duncan-Smith: Thank you Prime Minister.  I have found the solution.  The fi…whoops, not that.  I mean I have found the best solution.  Best.  My solution is I propose to give all the eager older people a wonderful opportunity in their later years to feel empowered, emboldened, important and free.  It is unpatriotic to make these eager older people stop work when they are 65, er, 67, is it 68?  Whatever it is now.  It is unfair to them.  It is unconservative.  It is politically correct nonsense.  It is against freedom.  It is the work of the devil Marx himself…..  Prime Minister, our plan is that we will let the eager older people have their freedom to work until they are 75.  Their freedom.  The most noble human attribute: Freedom!  Do we like that?  <raises voice> Freedom!  FREEDOM!

Duncan-Smith punches the air as cheers fill the room followed by chants of “Freedom!”


Johnson: Excellent.  Marvellous Iain.  We can always find another misuse of “freedom.”

Westley: Can I promote this?  Please let me do the promotion.  I’d be great at this.  I love freedom.  That’s why I got interested in politics.  Freedom.  Freedom!  

Johnson: Maybe.  Have you applied for your post-Brexit visa yet?

Silence.  Priti Patel coughs without any visible movement and her fixed thin smile unaffected.

Mercer: Mr. Duncan-Smith, would not most of the hardest working people who are most in need of a state pension die before they are 75?

Everybody looks at Mercer, each with a raised eyebrow.

Mercer: Ah.  I see.  What a good plan.  I’ll let the disabled veterans know how much freedom we are giving them at my next £100-a-head inspirational talk.

Duncan-Smith: A slow death is a conservative death.

Johnson: Indeed Iain.  I bet no-one has a better idea.

Patel: Hang ’em.

Barclay: Hanging is not an option.  I signed an executive order today – you may have seen the posed photo I posted on Instagram – wherein I banned the purchase of foreign rope.  Therefore, we have no rope for the hanging, and the ripping and the tearing.

Truss: Does Britain not make its own rope?


Raab: Pork markets. <sniggers>

Duncan-Smith: Would you like to hear the projected death numbers?

Rudd: Never mention the death numbers.  I never have.

Hancock: Neither have I.

McVey: Oh, don’t be silly.  The death numbers are counting victory.

Johnson: Thank you Iain.  That’s wonderful.  Now, I suppose we should talk about transport issues.

General groaning.

Johnson: Who’s transport secretary?  Oh, crickey.  I really did appoint you.  What’s happening with the lorries, ferris and whatnot?

Fox, er GreenShapps: I haven’t a flying f

Johnson, interrupting: Quite.  They can use catapults or something.  What about EU citizens?  What are we doing with them?

Patel: Hang ’em.

Barclay: The rope problem.

Cleverly: Could we use bungee rope?

Johnson: How?  It stretches.  Don’t you have a snide tweet to send?

Cleverly: Yes, I do.

Johnson, aside to Cummings: I try to keep him busy.

After tapping on his phone, James Cleverly laughs to himself.

Raab: We are not letting them back in, if they are out.

Johnson:  Who?  Oh, the EU people.  What if they are in?  Are we rounding them up?

Raab: I, er, we have no idea how many there are or who they are.  We can’t tell really because, y’know.

Johnson: Know what?

Raab: They, er, don’t look like immigrants.

Johnson: Ah.

Gove: What about this vote of no confidence in you Prime Minister?

Johnson: In us.  Vote of no confidence in us.

Gove: Yes, well, what about it?

Johnson: Do we care really?  We’re out of here and off to the foot of the rainbow as I said.

Gove: But it might scupper the departure date.  GNU and all that.

Johnson: Gnu?  What are you on about?  Have you been at it again? <sniffs>

Gove: No Prime Minister.  Government of National Unity.

Johnson: Oh that.  I think our good friends in liberally undemocratic are handling that aren’t they?  And changed UK or whatever they are called.  Get your friend to have a word with Ryan and Austin and who’s that other one?

Gove: What other one?

Johnson: The other one who left Labour because of some accusations of, er, sexual impropriety.

Truss: Woodcock!

Johnson: I don’t know the details but what’s his name?

Truss: Woodcock!

Johnson: She’s stuck.  Jangle the keys Esther.

Cummings: His name’s Woodcock.  Yes, we can count on him.  

Johnson: Good.  That’s that sorted then.  Easy peasy. 

Raab: Easy cheesy eh Liz? <sniggers>

Truss: What?

Johnson: I think we can move on to plans for after we’re out.  We’ll have to move very quickly with the “emergency” legislation.  We need to stick to three simple tasks.  Tell them Chloe.

Westley: 1) If it’s public, give it away; TPA has a list of clients.  2) Remove all workers’ rights.  3) Raise the fee for any legal action to a prohibitive level.

Johnson: Good.  That’s it.  Three simple tasks.  By the time the next government gets in everything will be gone, as will we.


Johnson: Liz, did you sort out any giveaways with Bolton?

Truss: I don’t think he understood.

Raab: Did you talk about apples? <sniggers>

Truss: What?  No.  I talked to him about state schools and about the NHS and how unscrupulous, criminal, offshore, made-up businesses with no principles can acquire huge unending hoards of cash but he just said he and his friend Elliott could get some militias together and blow everything up.  I couldn’t concentrate properly because of that stupid moustache.

Johnson: Yes.  We’d better save him for other plans, security plans.  Would that be a good idea Priti?  Would Cressida like that? 

Patel: Hang ’em.

Barclay: Bolton’ll need to bring his own rope.

Johnson: Bolton’s talents are varied.  On school giveaways, someone should talk to Betsy Davros.

Javid: DeVos.  Davros is from Doctor Who.  The half dalek man.

Johnson: Is he?  That reminds me.  What are we to do about Farage?  And Banks?

Patel: Hang ’em.

Barclay: No rope.

Gove: We needn’t worry about Farage and Banks.  They will be permanently entangled in pointless tit-for-tat legal cases with their counterparts Maugham and Cadwalladr.

Johnson: Ha!  There is nothing funnier than a tenacious liberal.

Kwarteng: As the Queen’s minister and an old Etonian I should point that there is one other person of whom we should be wary: The Queen.  She could be awkward.

Rees-Mogg: But why?  She is one of us.  Half of us in this room are related to her.  

Kwarteng: As the Queen’s minister and an old Etonian I noticed that some of her family are – or at least give the appearance of being – in possession of, dare I say it, principles.

Rees-Mogg: Kwasi!  That’s a scandalous thing to say.

Johnson: It could be true.  But, fear not.  We have insurance, don’t we Chloe?

Westley: Yes, some good mates of mine in the US have some revealing photos of Andrew that his mum wouldn’t like to be published.

Satisfied nodding around the room.

Johnson: I think we’re done.  Let’s eat.  It’s chicken for dinner.

Rudd: Chlorinated?

Johnson: Don’t be daft.  Close the coffin Jo.

<creaking sound>



No deal Brexit plans: Don’t mention the death numbers (parody)

People’s Vote is opposed to a vote of no confidence in Tory government

Aware of the possibility of an impending successful vote of no confidence in the Tory government deputy chair of People’s Vote Hugo Dixon wrote a convoluted piece for the Guardian wherein he presented spurious reasons why Labour should not call such a vote.

Hugo Dixon

He noted that remainer Tories would probably fail to support a vote of no confidence because their attachment to their party’s policies (aside from Brexit) is much stronger than their integrity as people (my words).  Dixon said that such an outcome would “knock Corbyn’s credibility.”  No, it would reaffirm the dishonesty of those Tories who claimed to be thoroughly opposed to a cliff-fall no-deal Brexit but were unwilling to do anything about it.  Rather than Corbyn’s credibility being damaged, the spineless duplicity of Grieve and his colleagues would be exposed.

Dixon suggested randomly that a failure to achieve a vote of no confidence would make it harder for Corbyn “to stitch together a cross-party pact.”  Whatever the result of a vote of no confidence, what would a “cross-party pact” be for?  Does Dixon want a pointless Government of National Unity?

It could be even worse if the vote of no confidence succeeded,” asserted Dixon because, apparently, Johnson could sneak in a no-deal departure before the election.  However, that scenario could be averted easily by parliament: If there is a majority for a vote of no confidence then, obviously, there would be a majority to stop a no deal departure on 31st October.

Dixon claimed he thinks the Tories could win a general election outright.  “The Tories might squeeze the Brexit party and win the election with less than a third of the popular vote.”  He cited opinion polls as evidence for his claim despite the fact that polls consistently show Labour as the party with the largest support and he forgot about recent poor election results for the Tories in council elections, EU elections and two parliamentary by-elections.

Dixon’s reasons for opposing a vote of no confidence were false, logically and practically.  He knew they were false.  His words were just a distraction, an act of confusion.  They were a concoction to arrive at his chosen deduction:

A better plan is to pass a law to force Johnson to ask the EU for extra time so we can hold a new referendum. The choice in such a ‘people’s vote’ would be between the crash-out Brexit the government wants and staying in the EU.”

Whatever description is applied – second referendum, confirmatory referendum, people’s vote – there is no reason to assume that the result would differ from 2016.  Equally, putting no deal versus remain as the choice would not be different from the first referendum because that was what most people thought the choice was three years ago. 

A second referendum has always been a daft idea but, more importantly, it has always been a distraction and a means to dissuade interest in a general election.  It is a dampening tactic on plans toward securing an election.

The convolutions in Dixon’s arguments descended into chaos.  He said Corbyn could call a vote of no confidence if attempts to call a second referendum failed and also said that if Johnson called an election then Corbyn should not support it if there existed the possibility of a second referendum.

But what if at some point Johnson himself just calls an election?  Well, under the Fixed-term Parliaments Act, he needs two-thirds of all MPs to vote in favour of such a snap election.  That means, if Corbyn says no, we won’t go to the polls.  And so long as a new referendum remains a viable way out of our political crisis, he should just say no.”

Additionally, he said a vote of no confidence after no deal departure might be easier to win. 

Dixon was all over the place with his arguments.  It remains the fact that People’s Vote’s simple aim is a second referendum as a tool to delay or cancel a general election.

Related blogs
Government of National Unity?
Government of National Unity: Caroline Lucas

People’s Vote is opposed to a vote of no confidence in Tory government

Government of National Unity: Caroline Lucas

Green Party MP Caroline Lucas wrote to ten elected middle-class white women to ask them to form an alderwomen cabinet with her to prevent a cliff-fall no-deal Brexit.


In an announcement of her plan in the Guardian she said

I believe women have shown they can bring a different perspective to crises, are able to reach out to those they disagree with and cooperate to find solutions.”

Included among the recipients of her letter were former Tory MPs Anna Soubry and Heidi Allen who changed parties without calling by-elections, current Tory MP Justine Greening, former Tory/LibDem coalition minister and current LibDem leader Jo Swinson and former Labour minister Yvette Cooper.  What unites the five named is their opposition to socialism.  A quick perusal of their voting records in parliament revealed commitment to austerity and opposition to socialist policy.  (The other five were Kirsty Blackman, Sylvia Hermon, Liz Saville Roberts, Nicola Sturgeon and Emily Thornberry.)

Lucas claimed the ten MPs “reach out to those with whom they disagree.”  That claim was demonstrably false: From the moment she became leader of the Lib Dems Swinson attacked the Labour leadership and sought to undermine Corbyn, Cooper has criticised Corbyn constantly from within Labour and Allen and Soubry’s (former) party Change UK mocked Labour policy and ideology relentlessly.  Rather than “reaching out” their shared objective has been to undermine and sideline the leader of the opposition.

Contradicting her claim quoted above Lucas said “political tribalism would likely scupper any moves that are just about putting Jeremy Corbyn in charge.  Politicians from some other parties have made clear that they would not serve under his leadership.”  It isn’t “tribalism,” it is opposition to socialism.  Centrists fear socialism much more than they oppose disastrous no deal Brexit.  They want to use a GNU to usurp the role of opposition to the Tories from the real opposition.  Lucas’ plan fits that strategy.  She chose politicians who sit in a narrow centrist band and who want to wrangle influence and power that their respective electoral supports don’t merit.

Lucas’ plan is intrinsically undemocratic as is any GNU as Lea Ypi explained: “A government of national unity led by backbenchers rather than the current leader of the opposition would not only suspend party democracy in the present, it would destroy confidence in it for the future.”

Lucas said she wanted to mend “our broken democracy.”  However, her plan to do that is at odds with democracy.

Postscript: The Colour Bar
It is not clear why Lucas chose to omit BAME women.  Racism has benefitted from Brexit; was Lucas’ decision appeasement, a “reaching out” to extreme Brexiteers, or was she just stupid?

Related blog
Government of National Unity?

Government of National Unity: Caroline Lucas

Government of National Unity?

Temporal confluence of possible success of a vote of no confidence in the government leading to a general election and the cut-off date for Brexit (31st October) could create a clumsy scenario where the election campaign is interrupted by automatic no deal departure from the EU.  Boris Johnson and his gang of extremist puppets of disaster capitalists could sit smugly after being ousted and wait for the cliff-fall that suits their employers while other parties are busy campaigning to win an election.

To avoid this, the concept of a temporary government was proposed.  Such a ‘government of national unity’ could be formed immediately after a successful vote of no confidence in Johnson’s government and peopled with all current opposition MPs (minus a couple of determined no-dealers like Kate Hoey) plus some Tory MPs who are opposed to no deal.  It would exist up to the general election; its sole purpose would be to extend the Brexit date beyond the election.

That might seem like an eminently workable and sensible plan.  It isn’t: See Lea Ypi’s article in Independent (link below).

Centrists’ shenanigans
The key motivation for the proponents of the plan is to prevent Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell from being Prime Minister and Chancellor respectively.  Grieve and his remainer Tory colleagues, Swinson’s Liberal Democrats including new recruit Chuka Umunna, the remnants of Change UK, other ex-Labour democracy thieves and the Progress mob in Labour are all committed to stopping socialism.  Anything but socialism is their guiding principle. 

They are against Jeremy Corbyn being the leader of the government of national unity but not because of what may or may not happen during its brief tenure; as stated above, the temporary government would have a single task of removing the October 31st departure date.  What the anti-socialists want is to prevent Corbyn displaying his capabilities as a leader just prior to a general election and if they move him aside dismissively they hope that would diminish his public stature while raising the profile of a hapless centrist.

The arrogance of centrists is boundless.  Corbyn is the leader of the opposition.  Immediately after a successful vote of no confidence in the Tory/DUP government Corbyn would have the first opportunity to form a government including the possible government of national unity.  For anyone to demand otherwise is underhand political manipulation and cowardice and is utterly contemptible.

An effective government of national unity could be formed after a successful vote of no confidence if the will exists to do it but the absocs see it primarily as a means to undermine Corbyn.  Stopping a socialist government is a bigger priority for the centrists than stopping a no deal Brexit. 

Labour must stand firm and not buckle: If Labour supports the concept of a government of national unity then Corbyn must lead it.  The centrists can go whistle.

Hilary Benn and Yvette Cooper

absoc n. Centrist politician, activist or journalist who opportunistically supports any political viewpoint or action in order to oppose socialism; acronym of ‘anything but socialism’

Recommended reading
Lea Ypi for Independent

Government of National Unity?