Westminstenders: Why didn't you whistle whilst you worked?

[RedToothBrush]

After over a year in the public dominion, SUDDENLY the mainstream media have picked up the story on breeches by the Leave campaigns over election rules. This comes off the back of the Cambridge Analytic scandal with Facebook data having been stolen and their offices (finally) being raided.

This has now led to the involvement of solicitors Bindmans (who were involved with the Gina Miller case and are associated with prominent Remain Jolyon Maugam) and have released a 53 page document they say is evidence of collaboration between Vote Leave and BeLeave campaigns. They state effectively that there is no 'smoking gun' rather a 'drip drip drip' effect of cumulative information (as Sam Coates succinctly sums up).

What difference does this make?

Both the Electoral Commission and the ICO have very little power and in law there doesn't appear to technically be any recourse. This needs to be addressed now as an extreme priority.

The prospect of another referendum being run in such circumstances, is alarming. Without an inquiry into what went wrong, how could you prevent any of this from happening again? There would also be feelings of some kind of establishment stitch-up to reverse the referendum, which could have major implications for trust in democracy in its own right.

There seems to be no easy answer here. And Brexit increasingly looks to be the turkey that was feared, though not exactly in the way the deeply flawed remain campaign made out.

Noises from the disgruntled Vote Leave director Dominic Cummings read like almost a threat to go after the EHCR which is just as poorly understood as the EU. And there is every reason to believe that Lexiter types would also be supportive if that meant they could take property from private ownership and put into state ownership without having to properly compensate.

Worth noting is that Cummings originally deleted his twitter account when this first started to surface. A least one of the whistleblowers was and still is a committed Leaver. Cummings seems rattled, but Cummings was previously on record as saying he wanted to destroy our existing establishment. He's not rattled about the damage to democracy nor I suspect even leaving the EU; he's rattled at prospect of being 'caught'. Make of that what you will.

With that in mind, shouldn't we be the mildest bit cautious about the intentions of Chris Wylie when he says we should have another referendum? Should we be cynical, rather than just accepting this as being great news and getting excited about an opportunity to reverse Brexit? Worst still our failure to be able to trust anything, in itself, is a sign of just how weak our democracy has become.

Are the efforts to dig up a story which should have been dealt with twelve months ago, going to help? Could they cause more damage and further risk our now seemingly ever fragile democracy?

I don't know. Impossible to tell. As Westministenders has said from very early on, the referendum wasn't just about leaving the EU but also a turning of backs on the concepts and principles of democracy. Only now is this really beginning to show its true ugliness to the masses. Even now, few see the real dangers here. Many are so blinded by the hatred of their political 'enemies' they turn a blind eye to their own side's zealotry and dogma.

The danger from the far right was always much more clear to see, but the danger from the far left as it grows bolder is also starting to be alarming.

If you think this is merely about leaving the EU, you are wrong. Even if we do stay in the EU after everything, we may still lose what it is to be a real functioning democracy.

Unless we promote these principles and involve all in society and give them a stake in the future; either inside or outside the EU we will be in a whole world more trouble.

And if that wasn't bad enough. Russian spies and murders plus the appointment of warmonger Bolton at the Whitehouse.

I always hated Angel Delight.

We were/are a nice middle class family so didn't actually "suffer" ourselves - but my parents were very aware politically (hence making the decision to leave during the Heath government - and ironically, part of why we came back from NZ after a right wing Government was voted in on the basis it would send the rugby team to SA with its blessing )

The 80s were indeed an awful time with Thatcher's "there is no such thing as society" I rejoiced when Labour got in 1997 - even though if voted (for the first time) SNP. But I'll never vote Labour again (at least, not until we achieve independence and a new, Scottish, Labour Party is formed).

Sadly, even Thatcher looks positively moderate compared to the austerity supporting politicians and policies we have now

It depends so much on your socio-economic position. One thing that did change in the eighties was that the differential between well-off and less well-off started widening, and then that widening accelerated.

There's a good book on the 70s ("When the Lights Went Out") that re-examines the good points about the 70s. It doesn't look at the gender perspective, though, which makes a big difference. Fewer women worked in the 70s, and they worked for less money. On the other hand, if you were one of the few women with a professional job, continued after having had children, you could probably employ a housekeeper (which is a strange thought, isn't it?).

So, I think the best we can say is that history is 'lumpy', not 'smooth'.

There's a good book on the 70s ("When the Lights Went Out") that re-examines the good points about the 70s. It doesn't look at the gender perspective, though, which makes a big difference.

In my first job (1 year sandwich placement) my boss (like me, half European, half English) was a woman, and her boss (double-barreled surname with cut glass accent to match) was too.

Blimey we both worked in profesional jobs the seventies and we certainly couldn’t afford a housekeeper. We could just about manage the childminder and were delighted when the children went into free full-time state nursery at three.
The only figure I could track down (no idea of accuracy) said 24% of women with children worked ful-time in the late seventies. Curiously my OH was in the emergent computer profession from 1971 and there were loads more women employed then. I think they got elbowed out when it became fashionable.

One interesting feature of the 80s was the rise in extra-parliamentary politics - probably because the Left was so far from actually gaining Parliamentary power.

I think it's because I lived through that that my soul shrivels a little when I hear Momentum rhapsodising about the virtues of an extra-parliamentary movement.

My abiding memory, now, is working for no money, no recognition, nothing that would go down well on a mainstream CV (though, oddly, would now, as the culture has, finally, shifted), and getting burned out in lots of extra-parliamentary political activity.

The culture seemed to open up with the arrival of New Labour - along with significant income redistribution. I think the hardships of the 70s and 80s can be tracked back to a really miserable, miserly, and inflexible benefits system, for a start. But this seems to be what people want to return to.

One interesting feature of the 80s was the rise in extra-parliamentary politics - probably because the Left was so far from actually gaining Parliamentary power.

Ah, Militant.

We lost one guy from our course in 1985 when Liverpool simply couldn't afford to pay uni fees.

I think the hardships of the 70s and 80s can be tracked back to a really miserable, miserly, and inflexible benefits system, for a start.

Which implies it's not now ?

It really is a good book. It makes the point that was raised wither here or on the 70s thread, about how the 80s saw the opening of UK markets to cheaper products + the tax breaks (for those in work) enabled by North Sea gas helping to mask the fact that people, generally, were getting poorer in relation to the very well off - and, of course, a part of this was the de-funding/selling off of of public goods.

Something that would have been an inescapable observation for those in areas devastated by the assault on manufacturing and mining.

But for those in work and in areas not hit by the closure of old manufacturing/mining, it really must have felt as though they could suddenly buy a lot more. And opportunities for women to earn more, for a longer working life, really did increase.

For me the seventies were good. In the early years I was at University, having been told by my headmistress that I would never get there, I thought, "'I'll show you." But the majority of women of my background got fobbed off with teacher training colleges, which were just as likely to offer a certificate rather than a degree course.

Then I went into public sector jobs, where the pay was notionally equal, although women didn't get the promotions. The attitude seemed to be "why shouldn't we promote this man" and he'd have to be a total incompetent not to be promoted, whereas with women it was "why should we promote her?" and she'd have to be good. However mid seventies there was a period of high inflation and in the public sector we kept getting cost of living increases, which was good.

Then I married and had the first of my children.

In the early seventies I did a lot of travelling on student rail passes - did joining the Common Market help? It certainly didn't hinder.

As for it being "the decade which style forgot", I recall that a lot of us were into handicrafts, so I floated around in crocheted shawls, and colourful flowery blouses, which I liked much more than the 80s 'power dressing' of suits and shoulder pads.

Then in the 80s too we had Thatcherism and a decade of greed and selfishness.

So was this a good time? I remember the first miners strike, there was a post office strike too but as a student for me this was all a bit of a lark. Was it good because I was in my twenties and had my life in front of me? I suspect so!

DG I think New Labour really did alter the benefits system. The stepped benefits system, which pays benefits whilst in low-paid employment, was (I think) a really useful subsidy, and particularly helpful for carers/primarily female returners.

New Labour increased benefits too.

Benefits have been savaged by the Conservatives, and they've managed to change the ideology behind benefits, too. It's much more in line with 70s/80s thinking now - which is grim.

I read many threads on MN lauding the change to Universal Credit - and it has just made me unutterably sad. It's one aspect of the 70s/80s I wish people hadn't forgotten. But they have, it seems.

I qualified for FSM throughout most of my childhood and have clear memories of how tough it was, and how miserable the amount given to families to live on was. I wouldn't wish that on anyone. Yet here we are.

We lost one guy from our course in 1985 when Liverpool simply couldn't afford to pay uni fees.

We lost some from our courses because they had wealthy parents who wouldn't top up the grant. You counted as a dependent until you were 21 unless you had been self supporting for three years. Parents would refuse to pay because they didn't agree with the choice of course their offspring were studying, or they didn't approve of the girlfriend/boyfriend, or in some cases they were just selfish misers.

The stepped benefits system, which pays benefits whilst in low-paid employment,
I recollect that in the early Seventies, with friends who worked in the Pottery industry, there was a lot of short time working, but the firms could order the work flow, so that the staff could work some days, and then sign on for four or five day's benefits, then back to work, back to five day's benefits..... It tided people over. This couldn't happen now.

Yes - I remember the power cuts as being an adventure! Also buying bread when you could find it and shopping in supermarkets (they were only small back then - would be classed a "Metro" or a "local" nowadays) in candlelight

My mum went to Uni as soon as my db started school (which happily was also when she qualified for free tuition and a grant by residency, especially as dad was still paying his way through medical school as a foreign student) so started work as a teacher the same day and same school that I started secondary in 1973.

As a family, we had a slightly different perspective to most though - due to our SA background (we'd already emigrated once or is that immigrated once for political reasons, to escape apartheid). I was brought up to believe in equality of opportunity, particularly in health and education (no coincidence that dad was a doctor and mum a teacher) and caring for the vulnerable in society. Principles I still believe in.

Living in Bearsden, I can remember helping my mum leaflet at the polling station during one of the 74 elections on behalf of Labour and getting extremely snooty and rude comments from the fur coat and nae knickers respectable denizens of Bearsden.

DG That's frightening. Is that because Liverpool went bankrupt? I may have to google if you can't supply details.

I qualified for a full grant at university. Only 2 of us from my state, girls' school went to university - such were the aspirations for working-class girls at the time. Lots of home economics and childcare lessons though - I think no-one had told the school that servants and nursery maids were going out of style.

I'm still bitter.

I know that student loans and university fees are a terrible solution and we need to push for more but I am so glad to see a real change in access for working-class children and girls. And it's good to see that change coming in my lifetime.

I think these experiences are why I'm such a Centrist. A progressive government - as far as my own experience tells me - is able to deliver real, actual change, that transforms lives - rahter than ideology and dreams.

DG That's frightening. sad Is that because Liverpool went bankrupt?

Yup. (Council hiring taxis to deliver P45s etc).

What was even more frightening was his complete resignation to the fact that his shot at getting a degree was gone - as if he didn't really deserve it in the first place.

I didn't live through enough of the 1970s and was a youngster during the 1980s so I can't venture an opinion! We had a couple of droughts, but that may have been in the early 1990s. I did know that there were people out there who were having it really rough during the 1980s - that could be something to do with my parents telling us to think ourselves lucky that we were ok and some school friends who were barely having meals outside of school. I do remember the level of homelessness about though, somewhere we're heading to again now

That's horrible, DG. That would have been me. Yes, you're reminding me where my deep fears of Militant come from.

Mother Is politely reminding us that this isn't a thread for reminiscing.

(Though I've found the reminder about Liverpool quite interesting.)

I don't think that middle class girls were expected to aim too high either. Theresa May would not have got to Oxford, or Cambridge, or gone into medicine from my school. She might have been expected to aspire to Manchester or Birmingham at a pinch, probably to do English or History. Really though, the career path marked out for the majority was College of Education, primary school teaching preferred. You then got engaged at the end of your first year, married when you finished college, taught for two years, then had your first child... So boringly predictable. The women't movement of the time was a wonderful thing. I am not knocking teaching, but I suspect this approach of pushing nice middle class girls into teaching regardless of whether they had any desire or aptitude, did a lot to devalue the profession. I felt that there were about half a dozen who really had a vocation to teach. I've lost touch with virtually all, but it didn't surprise me to find out that one who I definitely felt had a vocation ended up as a highly regarded Deputy Head. Others taught for a couple of years, and then did something else.

This is getting a long way from Brexit - as we do on these threads occasionally, because the situation we are now in is built on where we have come from.

I have a fundamental objection to some of the "stepped" benefits that Labour put in, even though they were done with the best of intentions Tax credits just seem to have subsidised business to get away with paying low wages It's perpetuated a "benefits culture" and allowed the nastier elements of the Right Wing to vilify "benefit scroungers".

While it was a good idea, it should have been put in place with a minimum living wage (and not a minimum wage that still required subsidy ) or even a national income (which some countries are now trialling).

And don't get me started on the Conservative hypocrisy and double-think regarding the need to incentivise rich people to work more by reducing taxes and giving them more disposable income while simultaneously saying that the poor and vulnerable need to have money that they don't have taken off them in order to incentivise them

Those that have, need more; those that have not, need less

Those that have, need more; those that have not, need less

From each according to his ability to each according to his need.

OK, it's probably unworkable - but as religion shows, it's no reason for not trying ....

Well, OK it's not a thread for reminiscing, and since most of us doing so were young and optimistic, but it is worth remembering that a lot of things were not good then, and that this is what the Brexiteers appear to want to take us back to.