JOHNSON DECLARES WAR ON REMAINERS.

At long last there's been real activity on the Brexit front although Prime Minister Johnson's move to prorogue Parliament in the week commencing 9th September has caused much gnashing of teeth amongst the forces of 'Remain'.

To be clear, what Johnson has done is perfectly normal, it's just the timing which has upset his opponents. Under normal circumstances, prorogation at this time would be seen as long overdue, the current parliamentary session having been the longest in many decades. Johnson has acted to end this session and introduce a new raft of proposed legislation, of his own design, through a Queen's speech on 14th October, that will then signal the start of a new session. However, as a by product of this action, parliament will be denied some time that it might otherwise have had to continue its interminable, convoluted and entirely anti-democratic pursuit of a reversal of the result of the 206 Brexit referendum.

Various accusations have been hurled at Johnson by all and sundry. Unsurprisingly, the leaders of the opposition, and pro-EU parties, have thrown their hands up in horror, shouting, "Foul !" in various ways. Speaker Bercow, notwithstanding his own highly contentious approach, has accused Johnson of perpetrating a 'constitutional outrage' and others are attempting to challenge the move in the courts. Given that the prorogation has been granted by the Queen, who must surely have been given the best possible legal advice before assenting to the request, it seems unlikely that such a move will be successful. Remainers are therefore left with little real time in which to prevent Mr Johnson from carrying out his pledge to leave separate the United Kingdom from the European Union on 31st October.

Hold on. Remainers are complaining that they will now have no time to debate and parliament will have no time to let its views be known ? Really ? Since the referendum in June 2016, more than 3 years has passed during which time Remainers have surely had more than enough time to let the rest of us have the benefit of their wisdom; parliament has held endless debates and held many votes on many proposals, ideas, options and possibilities, to very little end. Now, 166 weeks after the referendum and with just 9 weeks to go to the latest deadline, they still want more time - to do what ?

The answer to that particular question is obvious - they simply want to prevent Brexit from ever happening.

If time was such a problem, parliamentarians could have voted to shorten, or cancel, their summer recess which began on 25th July and doesn't end until 3rd September, but they did not. They could have voted to cancel their planned recess for the conference season, another 3 or 4 weeks of wasted time, but they did not. Instead, they waited and debated, procrastinated and waffled, took their holidays as normal and hoped that Brexit would just go away. It has not and now its opponents, having previously used every trick in the book unsuccessfully, have worked themselves up into a phony rage like spoilt children denied yet another go on the merry-go-round. They refuse to accept that time is up.

Next Tuesday, 3rd September, parliament will reassemble. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, Sajid Javid, will present his spending statement which will then be debated. At some point on Wednesday or Thursday, opponents of Brexit may try to introduce some wrecking measures, a bill to prevent Brexit or a vote of no confidence in the government; on Friday afternoon, members will wander off for the weekend. On the 9th they'll all come back from their constituencies for a couple of days before prorogation takes effect, possibly on 10th or 11th, but certainly by 13th, unless legal action prevents it, which seems highly unlikely. Any vote of no confidence will have little immediate effect as the Prime Minister has 2 weeks in which to have it reversed by a second such vote and, with parliament prorogued, that will not be possible. Any such vote would have to be postponed until after the opening of the new session and Queen's speech on 14th October.

Between the Queen's speech and 31st October there will be a maximum of 14 days for debate and action. Several days will be taken up with debate on the speech itself and the time available for Remainers to do anything will be very limited. A vote of no confidence could simply see the government resign and call a general election, which would not take place until well into November, by when Brexit would be have happened. The introduction of preventative legislation would be possible but would there be time ? Might there be, as some have suggested, more urgency in Brussels and a greater realisation that their needs to be some movement if 'No Deal' is to be avoided ? 

Deal or No Deal, that is the question. The cards have been dealt, but who has the trump hand ? How the game finally plays out has still to be seen.

REMAINERS KEEP PROJECT FEAR ON THE BOIL.

One again, the anti-democratic forces of 'Remain' have hit the headlines with a batch of scaremongering stories.

A new voice from the EU side, Natasha Bertaud who, it seems, is a spokesman for the European Commission, has opined that while a 'no deal' Brexit would not be good for either side, it would be proportionately worse for the UK than for the EU. However, Ms Bertaud seems to have offered nothing beyond this vague opinion.

We've also been treated to an exposé in the Sunday Times which has published elements of a government initiated report relating to something called Operation Yellowhammer. Supposedly, an assessment of the effects of a no deal scenario has revealed that the UK 'could' face a "3 month meltdown at its ports, a hard Irish border and shortages of food and medicine". This seems to be little more than a repeat of earlier scares and is moderated by the use of 'could'; clearly such a scenario is only one of various possibilities, although the manner of reporting rather glosses over this. The Sunday Times is, by the way, one of the newspapers which has a history of being opposed to Brexit in any form.

Joining these latest attempts to make Brexit seem like a disaster, the BBC, the well-spring of anti-Brexit sentiment, has claimed to have seen "internal local council planning documents" which have raised concerns about the standard of school meals in the event of no deal; the BBC also claims that "many councils" say that school meal costs would rise. As usual, this is a report which makes grand and wide-ranging claims with little or no actual evidence, at least that they are prepared to make public. 

The government, and Prime Minister Johnson, have refuted these assorted claims but it's the claims that have been headlined in the media; effectively, only the claimed negative effects of Brexit are being publicised. Thankfully, it has now been announced from Downing Street that a large scale public information campaign is expected to begin in the near future, so perhaps we will soon start hearing of the positive aspects of Brexit and the ways in which any short term problems of no deal will be handled.

Personally, the more scaremongering I hear, the more certain I am that getting out of the EU as soon as possible, deal or no deal, is an absolute necessity. In fact, the more scaremongering I hear, the more convinced I am that those who are promoting it are simply terrified that they are losing the argument.

Roll on 1st November, and the Brave New World of liberation, freedom and self determination.


P.S.
And now the BBC says it's seen another "internal local authority document" which claims that Brexit will be a threat to fuel supplies.

Why is it that the BBC is so keen to publicise every claimed bad effect of Brexit while hardly ever mentioning the benefits to be gained by taking back control of our own law making, financial arrangements, social policy, trade arrangements and so much more ? Clearly the BBC is placing itself at the forefront of the campaign to reverse the referendum result - as such, it is no longer an impartial reporter of news, despite its highly privileged position as the state broadcaster. The government should remove its funding and shut it down.

SWINSON REJECTS CORBYN, OPTS FOR CLARKE OR HARMAN ?!!

Who on earth will save us from power hungry, ego-maniacal and anti-democratic politicians ?

As the summer moves on towards early autumn, the forces of 'Remain' appear to be gathering yet again to prevent the democratically expressed Will of the People from being carried through. Jeremey Corbyn has put himself forward as a 'temporary Prime Minister' in a 'Government of National Unity' specifically to oversee the rejection of a so-called 'No Deal Brexit'. This is the man who led his Labour Party into the general election of 2017 on a manifesto that supported Brexit, who voted in favour of invoking Article 50 and has, until the last few weeks, consistently been opposed to reversing the result of the 2016 referendum. That he is also one of the last people who could ever be considered as a bringer of 'National Unity' almost seems superfluous and, unsurprisingly, his suggestion has been rejected by most.

While Corbyn has sniffed an opportunity to get his backside into the hallowed halls of 10 Downing Street, the egregious Speaker of the House of Commons, John Bercow, has had his say and made it clear that he will do everything in his power to prevent Brexit; he dresses this up as ensuring that Parliament will have its say on the matter and will not allow the government to force Brexit through, but this is just smoke and mirrors. Long ago, Bercow said that he would only remain in office for 9 years, then it was 10 and now his tenure appears to be open ended; he won't go until Brexit has been thwarted and he is determined to use his office, quite wrongly, towards that end.

Then we come to another anti-democratic Remainer, former Chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond. Hammond, like Corbyn, stood on a pro-Brexit platform in 2017 and voted for Article 50 but has never been anything other than anti-Brexit. His regular pronouncements from his lofty perch have been delivered, Moses-like, as if written on tablets of stone and unchallengeable. He has consistently ignored every potentially positive aspect of Brexit but has concentrated, like his equally arrogant pal, Governor of the Bank of England Mark Carney, on nothing but the terrors to come in the event of 'No Deal', which has largely morphed into the terrors of Brexit, full stop.  Hammonds' latest outright perversion of the truth is to claim that those who voted to leave did not want 'No Deal' and that to pursue such an outcome would be undemocratic; how can he claim this ? All he, or anyone else, knows is that the majority of voters voted to leave the European Union, nothing more was asked or stated. The only undemocratic action at the present time is the one favoured by Hammond, which is to ignore the result of the referendum and carry on as if it had never happened.

Yet another Remainer on the march is the newly crowned leader of the Liberal Democrats, Jo Swinson. Ms Swinson has apparently made it clear that she could not support a vote of no confidence in the government that led to a Corbyn Premiership, but she has been discussing the notion of a Government of National Unity with certain other once prominent figures. One of these, Kenneth Clarke, is recently turned 79 and has failed on several occasions to become leader of his own Conservative Party; however, he's a staunch Remainer and doesn't like Prime Minister Boris Johnson, so may be tempted by the proposal although he'd hardly bring unity to the Conservative side of the House. Secondly, Swinson has suggested Labour's Harriet Harman, 10 years younger than Clarke but still no spring chicken, who has previously had opportunities to seek the leadership of her party but has declined to take them; it seems that either she doesn't want to be 'top dog' or doesn't believe that she would command the support of enough of her fellow MPs. Basically, Swinson is looking for anyone who will make HER deputy Prime Minister and bring about a reversal of the referendum result. Her 'Government of National Unity' would be nothing of the sort, just a ragbag of MPs who, like her, want to prevent Brexit from happening.

There are now just 76 days to go before Brexit will happen unless there is a change in the law or an agreement to have a further extension of time. Neither will happen unless there is a change of government and the parliamentary time available to bring that about is very limited; as things stand, Parliament returns from its summer recess on 3rd September but will only sit for 2 or 3 weeks before they all trot off for the conference season, a recess which lasts the best part of 4 weeks. What this adds up to is that Remainers have 2 or 3 weeks in September in which to either bring down Boris Johnson's government, cancel the conference season recess or find some other means of bringing about a further delay to Brexit. Waiting until after the conference recess will almost certainly be too late.

So what will happen ? The only thing that's certain is that we'll all be subjected to yet more dubious statistics, lies and political shenanigans as opponents of Brexit, and democracy, try every dirty trick they can dream up in their efforts to defy the Will of the People and even to renege on what many of them have previously said they would do.

JOHNSON TACKLES CRIME, LABOUR ATTACKS GROUSE.

While Prime Minister Boris Johnson is concentrating on major issues such as tackling serious crime, his political opponents are continuing to concentrate on their pet and petty, largely imagined problems of supposed social injustice.

Johnson has announced plans to increase police numbers by the tens of thousands and also to increase prison places; he's indicated as desire to tackle violent crime with additional money for the Crown Prosecution Service and a review of both the length of prison sentences and the way in which they are operated. He wants dangerous criminals to be brought to justice, their sentences to "fit the crime" and those sentences to be operated in such a way as to keep the offenders off our streets. The automatic process of early release for all is to be reconsidered.

At the same time, what is the Labour Party doing ? Well, it's big idea today is to review the management of grouse shooting, claiming that this is something that damages the environment. Diane Abbott, who has clearly drawn the short straw on this nonsense, made a pretty poor fist of defending the plan on the radio this morning and clearly knew little about the subject. If this isn't just a case of Labour getting it's knickers in a twist over what it sees as an activity pursued by the hated 'upper class', I don't know what it is; it certainly isn't a matter of national importance.

Alongside this socialist claptrap, Caroline Lucas, another leftie but disguised as an environmentalist under the 'Green' label, has been arguing that the country needs an all female "emergency cabinet" in a bid to stop Brexit. She wants to oust Prime Minister Boris Johnson and form a "national unity government", which would, of course, be nothing of the sort; it would simply be a government that pursues the policies of which she approves rather than those of which she does not.

I don't know about anyone else but if I have to choose between tackling serious crime, reviewing the management of grouse shooting, and establishing an all female emergency cabinet, I know which I'd be voting for.

WILL BREXIT EVER HAPPEN ?

I find it amazing that those who want to keep the United Kingdom tied to the European Union consider ignoring the result of the 2016 referendum, ignoring the manifesto pledges of both major parties at the time of the 2017 general election and ignoring that they voted heavily in favour of implementing 'Article 50' all to be perfectly constitutional and democratic, while a Prime Minister attempting to enforce all of these is the opposite.

The general rumpus issuing from the anti-Brexit brigade is becoming almost surreal. The de facto leader of the Labour opposition is now clearly John McDonnell, with Jeremy Corbyn nowhere to be seen or heard. It is McDonnell who is fronting all of the major Labour Party anti-Brexit headlines while Corbyn remains in the shadows, emerging only rarely to show that he's still around; his dislike for the policy now being pursued by his party is palpable. 

Boris Johnson is pressing on with his plan for achieving Brexit by 31st October come what may, whatever that plan actually is. His opponents are chattering about stopping him, at all costs, even at the cost of bringing down the government, though Johnson appears to be indicating that even this won't stop him. Talk of a constitutional crisis abounds and the role of the Queen is being openly discussed. 

For the moment, Parliament is enjoying its summer recess and won't reassemble until 3rd September which, incidenatlly, is the day the UK declared war on Germany in 1939 - might we be in for something similar albeit 80 years on ? It is expected that there will be only a very short period of activity before MPs head off again, this time for their conferences which will see them away from Parliament until around 7th October, unless the conference season is postponed which has been suggested as a possibility by some anti-Brexiteers. However, assuming that things go ahead as already planned, MPs have about 8 or 9 sitting days in September in which to do anything meaningful before Brexit becomes a virtual inevitability. Leaving things until after the conference season is simply too late as, even if a no confidence motion was to be passed, Prime Minister Johnson would have 2 weeks in which to try to overturn it which would take us to about 21st October (another military date, being Trafalgar Day) A general election being called then would see Parliament prorogued and 31st October would come and go with the law as it stands meaning that the UK would leave the EU on that date; the election in mid-November would be an irrelevance as well as probably being a cold and wet one.

It looks to me as though the brief session in September might well be tempestuous and there must be a chance that the conference recess will be postponed. Then again, if Prime Minister Johnson can survive that period and conferences go ahead as planned, November 1st might well be a day of national celebration and even, as Michael Gove has suggested, a special Bank Holiday !

McDONNELL THREATENS BREAK UP OF UK

As part of a desperate bid to woo voters in Scotland, John McDonnell has apparently said that a future Labour government in the United Kingdom would not attempt to stop the Scots holding another referendum on the vexed subject of their independence. However, this puts him at odds with the leader of the Scottish Labour Party, so it looks like another mess over referendums.

Labour has previously been as opposed to breaking up the United Kingdom as has every other party of note; the only ones in favour are the nationalists in Scotland and Wales and, of course, those who want to establish a united Ireland. McDonnell's latest commitment changes things dramatically and potentially heralds a break up of the UK with Scotland going its own way. Once the UK has left the EU, it could well mean the Scots gaining their independence from the United Kingdom only to cede it to the far more bureaucratic and authoritarian powers in Brussels; as a very small nation, Scotland would also find its voice carries little weight in the debating chambers of the EU.

The Scottish Nationalists have previously suggested that leaving the United Kingdom would be managed quite simply. The Queen, or her successor, would remain head of state and the Scots would keep sterling as their currency; there would be no 'border problems' and movement of people and goods would not be hindered. Given the attitude of the European Union to the little matter of the border between Northern Ireland and the Irish Republic, as well as its insistence that new member states must adopt the Euro as their currency, this all seems to be 'pie in the sky'.

IF Scotland achieves independence and then seeks to join the EU, it would have to adopt the Euro. The border between Scotland and England would become a frontier and the EU would undoubtedly want to implement border controls to prevent the nasty English from gaining any advantage. Tearing up the Acts of Union of 1706 and 1707 would throw the British Constitution into crisis and it is far from certain that the government in London would look kindly on the monarch continuing to also have a role in Scotland. The Scots might then be faced with either finding a different monarch or accepting the creation of a Presidential post - President Sturgeon, perhaps.

McDonnell's plainly electioneering stance demonstrates just how far Labour is now prepared to go in order to gain power. For power in Westminster, they will happily sacrifice the integrity of the United Kingdom. These power hungry Marxists must never be allowed to gain office. 

EIGHTY SIX DAYS TO BREXIT.

Summer is here and politicians around the western world have gone on their holidays, regardless of the supposedly major issues that confront them. That said, President Trump has still found time to upset the world's financial markets with an escalation of his trade war with China, and Prime Minister Johnson is working hard on what seems to be more of an election campaign than preparations for Brexit. 

Although things have gone a bit quiet, Brexit remains a key issue and those want to prevent it are continuing to make occasional forays into the media with their forecasts of gloom and doom. Prime Minister Johnson appears to be set on sticking to his deadline of 31st October although the Brexit Party has been telling its members that he is less than determined about this; their line is that Johnson is backsliding at a rate of knots and that Brexit at the end of October is far from certain. With less than 3 months to go, we'll find out the truth soon enough.

European politicians are continuing to insist that the deal on the table is the only one possible and it's reported that the European Union has all but accepted that the UK will leave without an agreed deal. However, it's also been suggested that the Irish Prime Minister may be starting to get a little concerned about the effects of a 'no deal' Brexit on his economy and could be beginning to consider alternatives for resolving the Irish border problem. Given that it is this one issue which is at the heart of the UK's dispute with the EU, providing a resolution would be a major step forward.

Where will it all end ? Will the UK leave the moribund straitjacket of the European Union on 31st October or will Parliament and the naysayers find a way to prevent it ? Are we heading for a very early general election and the prospect that Johnson will soon be an ex-Prime Minister ? Will there be a second referendum ? Will we soon have a Marxist government in power, headed by the Corbyn-McDonnell double act ? 

The referendum was held one thousand, one hundred and thirty nine days ago; since then politicians, and others, have hummed and ha'ed, far too many spending their time on looking for ways of frustrating the referendum result rather than ways of putting it into action. Now, in just another eighty six days, all should come to a conclusion.

Or will it ?