Westministenders. Boris and the Country find out what ‘Mayism’ looks like.

[RedToothBrush]

Its fair comment to say that Theresa May doesn’t like people who disagree with her.

In her New Year’s message, the Prime called for unity. She insisted that she would represent the interests of the 48%. I’m sure I’m not alone in finding these comments rather at odds with her actions.

The New Year hasn’t started to well for her with the resignation of the UK’s ambassador to the EU, Ivan Rogers in which he accused the government of ‘muddled thinking’ and urged civil servants to stay strong in delivering bad news to ministers.

Rogers had, made a point of stressing that the UK needed a transitional deal which would be around 10 years which went down like a cup of cold sick. His resignation has been greeted by howls of joy by rampant Brexiteers. Yet given that when the UK entered the much less complex European Community in 1973, we had a seven year transition period in, the suggestion of a 10 year exit, actually makes sense if you want to Leave the EU and its far from an obstructive position. Rogers has subsequently commented that he thinks we have a 50:50 chance of a chaotic exit now, given ministers refusal to listen to reason.

In all honesty that looks like an optimistic assessment at this moment in time.

It all begs the question of what next?

To look at the future, it’s worth rewinding a little and seeing how we got here. Just how did May become PM over and above her political rivals when she has very few political allies and friends.

Back in October 2015, as still Home Secretary, Theresa May made her speech at the Conservative Party Conference and said that immigration makes it "impossible to build a cohesive society."

This Telegraph Article from the time made the observation that the speech was designed to fan the flames of prejudice in a cynical attempt to become Conservative leader

How is this ever going to be reconcilable with Remainers? That is not just an anti-immigration stance. It goes way beyond that. May was apparently a reluctant Remainer, but there has always been this accusation that she was never fully on board and never actively campaigned. I just don't buy it anymore.

Then there was how she worked with the Coalition Government.

In September the Liberal Democrats made the accusation that she repeatedly trying to interfere with a crucial Government report on the effects of immigration back in 2014. This was not the first such accusation. It suggests she was anti-expert and post-fact just as much as any hard core Brexiteer. Norman Baker also accused her, before he later resigned, of suppressing information about to deal with people on drugs. His resignation letter, is incredibly reminiscent of Ivan Rogers resignation letter:

In a scathing verdict on Ms May’s leadership, Mr Baker warned that support for “rational evidence-based policy” was in short supply at the top of her department.

And

He told The Independent yesterday that the experience of working at the Home Office had been like “walking through mud” as he found his plans thwarted by the Home Secretary and her advisers.

“They have looked upon it as a Conservative department in a Conservative government, whereas in my view it’s a Coalition department in a Coalition government,” he said.

“That mindset has framed things, which means I have had to work very much harder to get things done even where they are what the Home Secretary agrees with and where it has been helpful for the Government and the department.

“There comes a point when you don’t want to carry on walking through mud and you want to release yourself from that.”

Was Theresa May to blame? Did Norman Baker have a point? Well Ivan Rogers seems to think he does.

The Economist’s Indecisive Premier article does say that May worked well with people she got on well with or had a shared vision with – including Lynne Featherstone, the first Liberal Democrat to work with her at the Home Office. The trouble is, that there is an ongoing pattern of her having problems with those she doesn’t get on with and her desire for control and micro management lead to a tendency to build an echo chamber rather than build a consensus or more pragmatic approach. It also notes she had personal clashes with Gove, Osborne and Johnson on key issues. Its not just Liberal Democrats she has a problem with. Of course, she only has one of the three in her current Cabinet. Let’s not forget Mark Carney either. It rather leads you to suspect that Baker was not the first, nor will Rogers be the last.

This does not bode well for compromise with the EU. May does not seem to do compromise unless backed into a corner and then its because she has been forced and then not on her terms. May can not bulldoze in the same when she does eventually sit down for talks.

It does not bode well for the future of this country, if senior positions are only for Yes Men regardless of whether you are a Remainer or a Leaver. If she has these ongoing issues with Gove, Osborne and Johnson, is it a problem? Will they continue or will they quit? Will Davis or Fox get frustrated at her constant slap downs. Will the lack of friends be a problem in the long run. Especially when one of her closest allies in Phillip Hammond is also seeming to be facing the same frustrations.

Of course, no friends, also means May has plenty of people she has no problem with throwing under the Brexit Bus.

Will May take any responsibility if it all goes wrong? Who did Theresa May blame for not achieving the all-important immigration target in 2014?

Theresa May: Lib Dems to blame for immigration target failure

It was not her failing. Of course.

And the legal battles she lost whilst at the home office? Not her fault. It was the left wing liberal human rights lawyers, therefore Human Rights are the problem and must be removed.

Never hold up the mirror and admit your beliefs are wrong. Fudge the figures, supress the reports, fuel the flames, blame others, send people to Coventry or ignore them until they quit in frustration. Anything but take responsibility or listen to what you don’t want to hear. She is well versed in it all. These are not the hallmarks of a great consensus builder.

When May calls for unity, is it genuine or merely a precursor for the inevitable blame stitch up? Excuse my cynicism but this is the very definition of what Mayism is. Oh and don’t forget the Red, White and Blue bit. Patriotism the last resort of the scoundrel.

May is set to make a speech later this month outlining her commitment to Brexit. It sounds like yet another guaranteed source of conflict and division rather than unity. Davis and Johnson are helping write it. Fox has been sidelined... which fits with the rumours that he's first under the wheels.

May WILL unite Leavers and Remainers in the end. In how we look back at how she drove us off the cliff and how she sold us all down river with her hard headed blinkers.

Unfortunately the chances are, this will be after it is too late at this rate, unless people on both sides wise up and realise what is really at stake.

Did some one post that even le Pen is wary of fucking up as much as May is?

Beyond DT's US(and even there) and here, aren't we the laughing stock of most democracies?

Doesn't take much to make this place look even more idiotic, but think she's managed.

The state of the £ says it all.
30% down.
Performance like an emerging nation
People many not like remain arguments, but they're going to dislike food prices in June even more.

She did say she wanted to give EU citizens in Britain certainty that they can all remain Funty, you didn't miss-hear it.

She said she would do it straight away but some of the 27 are not happy about reciprocity.

eu citizens who have accumulated the right to remain and are able to prove this may be able to stay once we are out.

however families will be torn apart/ the french grandmother who has been married to a britsh man and has lived here as an eu citizen for 40 years may not qualify for right to remain or may be unable to prove that she has lived here due to not having the right paperwork (bills, NI contributions etc)

a spanish man married to a brit may now not bring his widowed mother who needs family and some care to britain as poor granny wont be able to access nhs services etc.

etc etc

'Did some one post that even le Pen is wary of fucking up as much as May is?'

It appears so. The French have seen the mess Britain is in and it does not appeal to them. Le Pen knows it would be a vote loser hence her stating she sees France remaining in the EU.

families are much more tied and entangled with the rest of europe through inter marriage but ms may is totally ignoring this.

www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/16/eu-citizens-in-uk-could-face-deliberate-hostility-policy-after-brexit

worth reading

The Home Office has repeatedly said it cannot guarantee those rights unless the rights of the 1.2 million British people in the EU are reciprocated.

However, Tingley, who has been dealing with immigration cases for 20 years, says if Britain fails to get a deal for Britons in Europe it is highly unlikely that it will move to deport EU citizens in retaliation. Logistically, it would be impossible and politically, it would be explosive, he believes.

However, it could subject EU citizens to the Immigration Act 1971 and make it as difficult as possible for people to stay, he told a Guardian podcast.

He says the Home Office has deliberately operated a “hostile environment” policy for years in an effort to get non-EU immigration numbers down “because the Home Office doesn’t have the manpower to do what parliament has asked asked it to do”.

Advertisement

He says it has in effect outsourced immigration control to employers, landlords, banks and airlines, allowing them to seek proof of residency and create havoc for people if they do not have documents.

“In the nightmare scenario the day after Brexit, an employer who is on the ball, who holds a sponsor licence, will need to see their Europeans are here lawfully and they will ask the question: ‘Have you regularised your stay?’” he says. If not, they may have the right to terminate employment, he says.

She didn't imply any of that at all User
She said she wanted to give certainty as soon as poss, but EU would not agree to do the same.

semi what are you talking about? she doesn't need to imply any of this it's obvious. once britan has brexited families will be torn apart. some EU born individuals may be allowed to stay but those who don't have the right paper work are at risk not to be granted the right to remain card, that's a fact, now. i know this because aim dealing with the HO regularly on these issues.

people who have styled here or abroad even if they get right to remain will be separated from their ageing parents extended families etc

may has also threatened the EU several times in her speech, not great in terms of business negotiations an diplomacy. silly woman.

She said she wanted to give certainty as soon as poss, but EU would not agree to do the same.

So she's blaming the EU again. Never mind that Verhovstad has talked about associate citizenship.

Her cheerleaders will love the petulant threats. Like a yapping chihuahua.

She may be a thug, but she's an unintelligent one. Often doesn't end well for those types.

I was beginning to come to terms with pushing forward a 'soft brexit ' but she has torn apart ALL and ANY goodwill that time had endowed on the referendum.
how can she ask for an out of the economic union yet expect to keep a deal for no tariffs?
How can she say she wants out of EU in its entirety, whilst saying she still hopes we can opt into bits and pieces, paying as we go??
Finally, HOW FECKIN DARE SHE USE MY CHILDREN by saying it's for their future, my children who have been born and raised within the EU with all the social and economic benefits they believed were theirs.
I cam assure her that my 16 year old is angry beyond belief at the referendum result, her anger made mine look like a minor irritation 😈😈😈

Whether UK retirees will be able to stay in Spain, to take one example of a fairly large group, will depend to a great extent on whether the UK will continue to pay for their healthcare. At present anyone entitled to a UK state pension can get an S1 form which covers their treatment in another EEA country.

If the UK is no longer in the EEA, or for another reason will not continue to fund UK state pensioners' health care, those living in Spain will have to buy private health insurance or fund their own treatment - those are Spain's rules, have been for a considerable time and involved treating UK citizens on an equal footing with Spanish citizens.

Those who have the financial resources may be in a position to stay. Many will not be able to afford the expense and will have to risk staying with no health cover, or return to the UK, where they will have to prove habitual residence in order to get NHS treatment.

That will not be a decision by the EU or by the Spanish government - Spain's rules will not have changed. It will be entirely up to the UK.

Whether UK retirees will be able to stay in Spain, to take one example of a fairly large group, will depend to a great extent on whether the UK will continue to pay for their healthcare.
But May and the Eurosceptics will blame the EU.

Another question here is whether they will get the automatic uplift to their state pensions, as they do now. This is one detail which would need to be sorted out. Don't assume that this will happen. UK pensioners in Canada, for example, have their pensions frozen at the rate pertaining at the date they left the UK. Although this is known to cause hardship, there are no plans to do anything about it. The costs I imagine would be relatively negligible.

I don't know how many UK pensioners there are in Canada, but I suspect that there are a good many more in Spain.

Apparently there are around 250,000 UK pensioners with frozen state pensions in Australia.

Reading Australia's take on the changes to the pensions arrangements between it and the UK was a revelation for me.
www.dss.gov.au/about-the-department/international/international-social-security-agreements/termination-of-the-social-security-agreement-with-the-united-kingdom-uk-1-march-2001/termination-of-the-social-security-agreement-with-the-uk-information-for-prospective-migrants

And this is a country which is a member of the Commonwealth, a body by which we are apparently setting great store, now that we're leaving the EU.

Is that correct about health cover for long term residents in Spain? DS has lived in Spain for over 24 years married to a Spanish national and working full-time throughout. He doesn't pay private insurance or fund his own healthcare. Here in France those living "in a regular fashion" (tax and health cover) longer than five years can pay into a health caisse at 8% of income over a threshold. (Plus the normal top-up insurance). That is not limited to EU/ EEA afaik and would presumably replace the S1 if it comes to it.

I know what happened to my friend and her husband pre-ref. Her MP had to get involved with how the Home Office were handling his application to remain. Not everyone was unaware. The problem is more getting support for that when you are facing a tidal wave of anti-immigration rhetoric. Saying anything rarely ended in anything other than abuse.

Do you think Britain was right or wrong to vote to leave the European Union? (YouGov 16/1/2017)
Splits by current voting intention:

Conservative
69% right 26% wrong 5% DK
Labour
25% right 66% wrong 9% DK
UKIP
94% right 4% wrong 2% DK
Liberal Democrat
10% right 87% wrong 3% DK

The EU ref vote by 2015 vote (from Lord Ashcroft)
Conservative
58% Leave 42% Remain
Labour
37% Leave 63% Remain
UKIP
96% Leave 4% Remain
Liberal Democrat
30% Leave 70% Remain

Now either there is a lot of people changing their mind about whether Brexit was a good idea or not, or people are changing their voting intension a lot.

Labour taking a pro-Leave stance is a bit of a problem in this context. Its an effect to win back support from UKIP but I'm not convinced this really is the right move at all. If things go towards a hard brexit then what happens?

A further YouGov Poll has revealed just how much people are shifting about:

Vote in 2015
CON
Current intension 88% Con, 3% Lab, 3% LD, 4% UKIP and 2% Other.
(A 3% swing to LD or Labour would represent about 340,000 people for context)

LAB
Current intension 7% Con, 74% Lab, 12% LD, 3% UKIP and 4% Other.
(A 7% swing to Con is about 654,000 people, a 12% swing to LD 1,121,000 people and 3% to UKIP 280,000 people.)
It also suggests that the threat from UKIP is somewhat overstated.

LD
Current intension 11% Con, 15% Lab, 63% LD, 7% UKIP and 4% Other.
(An 11% swing to Con is about 265,000 people, while 15% to Lab 362,000 - so a considerable net gain by the LDs from both LAB and CON even though they have lost sizeable percentages of their 2015 vote which is bizarre given how few votes they actually got in 2015).

UKIP
Current intension 21% Con, 6% Lab, 1% LD, 71% UKIP and 1% Other.
(A swing of 21% to Cons is 815,000 votes, 6% swing to Lab is 232,000. This would mean a net gain from Labour of just 50,000 votes across the country!).

Overall, based on these figures if you compare 2015 to this, this is the change in votes:
CON: 1,1709,514 (+374,938)
LAB: 7,852,287 (-1,495,017)
LD: 3,022518 (+606,656)
UKIP: 3,658493 (-222,606)

The story is not about the Conservatives gaining - almost all of which has come from UKIP, its about Labour's total collapse and direct being totally bizarre and clueless.

There is another story that's missed in that too. 736,029 have changed vote from all of the above. That has to be rising regional nationalism and dissatisfaction politics as a whole.

But even THIS is not the full story:

The YouGov poll for the Times also asked what percentage of Remain voters now support the LDs and how this has been changing.
Aug 31 - 10%
Sep 5 - 11%
Oct 14 - 15%
Nov 15 - 15%
Dec 9 - 18%
Jan 16 - 20%

So the Lib Dems have apparently DOUBLED their support since August, yet this is NOT showing up on polls for some reason. We know the LDs have been making gains in local by-election that don't match up with the polls. Why? It seems odd.

Britain Elects Poll of Polls had LDs at 8.1% in August. They are now at about 9.7%. The highest I've seen them in any poll has been 14% in Dec.

10% of Remain voters is just 1,614,124. 20% is 3,228,248 (They got 2,415,862 in 2015). If you add in Leave voters who also intend to vote LD they are probably closer to 3,576,463 voters at present. This would put them perhaps closer to 13% than is being suggested. This would put them on a much more level footing to UKIP.

Put that back into constituency boundaries, and talk about who is more likely to actually turnout to vote and could you predict what would happen?

I couldn't.

No wonder May wants to hold out until 2020's gerrymandering of borders.

However the big upside is, there really does seem to be very little chance of a UKIP breakthrough. ConKip are already doing what they want.

No wonder Arron Banks is reluctant to sink much more money into UKIP. The role of Farage and Banks is now much more about being a lobbying group rather than a political group. And their influence is hugely being over represented.

Also worth noting is that the Conservative and Labour both have the least unified opinion on Brexit from their potential voters. How Brexit pans out therefore really has most significance for them. The Conservative as the government have to make Brexit a success or doubt will creep in, and there is no guarantee that their 26% of Brexit doubters will stick with them. That equates to about 3million voters. (This however would still leave them with a popular majority even if every one of those went to Labour as it is now!)

Equally, if the Conservatives cock up Brexit or suggest a Brexit which is arse then Labour could loose up to 66% of their voters if they do not challenge the government more. That's about 5million voters. (Even if every one of those voters went to the LD that would still only put the LDs on about a maximum of 32% of the popular vote).

That means that the trouble is that unless the government really do fuck up Brexit and the LDs manage to miraculously pick up 3million currently Conservative leaning voters and 5 million currently Labour leaning voters in addition to the voters who already intend to vote LD, then there will be insufficient number to get rid of this shit show. (That 8million plus 3 million making 11million). And UKIP could still collapse with 3million votes more likely to go blue than red. Theresa May knows this.

Mind you: Remain voters 16,141,241 with death rates and the young on side.

One Final Thought. If you calculate the percentages by whether they think it was right or wrong to leave the EU by voting intention for the 4 main parties then you get the following:

Right: 10,345,277 Wrong: 11,002,914 DK: 1,456,027
The balance of conviction lies with Remain. Leave has to convince half of all don't knows even to match the Remain numbers.
To put it another way:
Right: 45% Wrong: 48% DK: 6%
And that's not counting support for the SNP, PC or the various NI parties...

May wants to get a50 done by the end of March. Can't think why.

Now about that Mandate...

that's eye opening patty.

May says she wants a fair britain. So she lies.

Is it fair for people to pay into the pension system over several decades through NI contributions and then to be told to either remain in the UK in old age or loose the right to your pension? Doesn't sound fair but punitive.

I'm sorry I have nothing sensible or hopeful to add. The grief I felt in June has come flooding back and I am so so angry. How dare that woman say the country is coming together. I've never felt more alienated from the country of my birth.

EmilyAlice your DS is registered with the Spanish social security system and contributes to it through his full-time job (or so it is to be hoped) - that's where his health coverage comes from.

S1 is, or has been up until now, for UK citizens of state pension age who have contributed to the UK National Insurance system during their working lives.

Yes I have just checked (and know about S1 because I have one in France). The .gov website says that if you are not covered by any other means in Spain then you can pay in at 157€ a month at 65+. I don't think you pay top-up insurance in Spain and we already pay 200€ a month for that in France, so it seems reasonable. The 200€ plus 8% of income here would strain our budget a bit, but well worth it for what we get.

A system where you have to live in the country to be able to receive your pension isn't unusual actually. The US do that as wall as other countries (Norway is another one I think).

What I can see happening though is the uk saying that yu have to live in the uk to receive your pension and at the same time will tell some people who have spent all their working life in the uk that they can't stay here anymore.
Until now, you could transfer your pensions to your home country but you can't anymore.
So that means in effect, the uk is potentially protecting themselves to also be paying a hell of a lot of pensions to people who have paid in years...