jaywalker

DulwichFox Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > From Twitter > > Petitions Committee @HoCpetitions > We have removed about 77,000 signatures which were > added fraudulently. We will continue to monitor > for suspicious activity. > 2:46 PM - 26 Jun 2016 > > In isolationist North Korea, one of the least > internet-connected countries in the world, 23,778 > people had apparently gone online to express their > frustration at the UK?s decision to quit the EU. > > This Petetion really is meaningless. Anyone can > sign it.. > > Is this the way people want elections to run if > they do not get the right result. ? > > Foxy that is pretty IT unsavy Foxy. The BBC last night showed an IP-address heat-map of those subscribing to the petition to undo the undemocratic referendum (see my other posts for why it was undemocratic). These mapped the new city-states exactly. now Foxy you have two choices it seems to me. you can either agree that 95% of these preferences are legitimate (those with suspect IP addresses having been removed) or you must subscribe to the idea that some state-sponsored apparatus (to have the necessary resources) has engineered a false vote through virtual private networks (so disguising the true IP addresses) that precisely matches the distribution of remain votes in the referendum itself (I guess you could also claim that THAT was fraudulent too :-) ). I'm afraid you are being a little ill-informed here.

Great post Azira - that video says it all. The referendum is now revealed as profoundly undemocratic. The will of the people is not expressible by a single vote unless a massive majority and based on planning not posturing so that the revealed 'will' is stable. Clearly that is NOT the case here. That will has already moved on as the lies are exposed. If one wants democracy of this kind, new information demands new referendums as it comes to light (as is also the case when any plan has actually been made). A single referendum is aporetic. The whole point of parliamentary democracy (as opposed to plebiscites) is that there is an ONGOING interrogation of policies. But of course there could not be a plan, could there? The antimony in the leave camp would have been exposed (as it now is). The Norway solution (the only possible one that would be non-catastrophic for the UK economy) is anathema to the Ruritanians because it demands free movement of labour as the price of a common market.

I have just seen on the news the French are saying that the UK cannot expect the banking passport to continue. It is not a treaty obligation, just a policy arrangement. Curtains for the City if Leave cannot secure it.

well, could we not do some scenario planning? one possible course (all possibles currently being a little difficult to get a grip on) is this: Tories in limbo next couple of months. Corbyn gets vote of no confidence this week. EU leaders demand article 50 is invoked, UK refuses. Corbyn is re-elected by rank and file party members, but does not have the support of more than a rump of MPs (about 50 I think). Labour splits. Corbyn keeps labour party but ceases to be leader of HM opposition. New centre left party, Umunna as leader if can be persuaded, otherwise Cooper. New party almost certainly becomes official opposition (no elections necessary, MPs can and do just shift party) and forms new shadow cabinet. Parliament still has years to run. Tory leadership election: MPs give Teresa May big majority over Boris. But final two candidates must go to members: Tory members give Boris overwhelming majority over May. Remain Tories refuse to serve under Boris. New centre-right party formed under May. New government under Boris is refused supply by parliament (or Queen cannot appoint him in first place knowing no supply). EU begin to cancel opt-out privileges negotiated by UK over past couple of decades. Very large number of EU workers begin to arrive in UK before we split. Signs of recession in real GDP become apparent. Instability on financial markets. First sign of significant inflation after collapse of sterling: yet Bank of England feels forced to print money wholesale to try to prevent recession and preserve integrity of banking system. Financial collapse threatens. New govt of national unity formed by centre-parties (Umunna, May) on condition of electoral reform (otherwise centre parties, with majority in parliament, would be swept away at next general election). Actually of course, tory party doesn't have to formally split here - the new government can be non-party based, so Boris would just be leader of a party and not himself in government. New government says they will consider invoking article 50 when the conditions seem right.... but deteriorating economy makes it clear that that time is not now. General Election (possibly only in 2020). IF then General Election under new voting rules. New coalition government announce they have no immediate plans to invoke article 50 and begin renegotiating the taken-away privileges. Economy swiftly recovers if EU not itself in crisis by then (significant elections there are in 2018). ELSE General Election under current rules. Huge gains for far right in election. Centre MPs squeezed out by first past the post. Capital flight, inflation, chaos. I fear the worst. The big problem is that the rest of the EU may start disintegrating. Then it is Ruritania here we come.

post moved to new constitutional crisis thread.

Shaunag is right - don't delay. The rules will change very fast as the implications become clear. I am deeply ashamed of my country right now.

:-)

Blah Blah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > What worries me more is the disappearance of > Osborne The problem is that the starting point (not conclusion) of all this is a 5% recession i.e. fall in real GDP. AND, We already have a 5% inflation hit on the way due to the collapse of the pound (more of that on Monday). Inflation then tends to be self-fuelling (with no EU workers to take the strain, wage claims will try to leap-frog prices). So we now have imminent stagflation (stagnation and inflation) even if we announced today that we are staying in EU. (some serious calls for this by the way ? parliament is sovereign so if things get out of hand very quickly they may simply refuse to ratify result or support brexit govt). The central bank reaction will be to print money: watch for interest rates cuts to zero and cash handouts to financial institutions in distress (particularly insurance companies, pension funds (bad luck to the silver voters who wanted this) and, particularly, any firms with foreign currency denominated debt exposure.) This will be in the name of ?financial stability?. That will shift inflation up massively (on the alibi of stopping unemployment). Then with positive-feedback in inflation getting out of hand (that takes about 12 months) reverse gear, interest rates up (if only because the govt otherwise unable to finance its deficit) and unemployment 3 or 4 million before you can blink. After that I guess it?s anyone?s guess. My fear is that those who were already suffering economically, so voted Brexit, will then think its all a conspiracy of bankers/London/etc as the govt has to radically cut spending on benefits/NHS etc: affecting precisely the constituency that voted ?out?. Then the far right gets traction big time. The economics is very well evidenced: think 1971 (or in a much smaller way the ERM exit debacle). Really the economics is clear and has been repeated (but not on this scale) several times. There is already a massive hit to the London economy, that economy currently bails out Ruritania but will now be unable to do so. HSBC announced 1000 high earning job cuts today, 2000 Morgan Stanley yesterday. We have seen nothing yet. Get today?s FT if you can (usually on sale tomorrow also). The most disturbing I?ve ever seen, and unlike the rest of the press written for a reading age of at least 14.

Lynne Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Can I start a petition not to have another > petition? Lynne, that is the entire point of the demand for another referendum. I did not have to read Kant to realise that there is an aporia in the notion of a single referendum. Aporia: the idea of a single referendum undoes the conceptual basis on which it is posited. IF the will of the people is sovereign on any particular issue THEN the will of the people must be consulted on EVERY particular issue. Now, this aporia could be sutured: we could have a rolling (of course, online) market for/against EU exit with a deadline of 2 years set when article 50 is invoked. Now how do you think that market would unfold as we came to study the consequences? I do not have to think referenda are a good idea to think that IF we have one THEN we should have many.

maxxi Wrote: --------------------------------------------------- > > I think there needs to be a general election and a > new government chosen that sets out exactly how it > will deal with EU. I agree, but it is not clear how such a manifesto could be formed, or implemented (remember the Scottish MPs). Rather it suddenly looks quite likely that a new centre party will emerge - the non-Corbyn centre-left joining the non-Ruritanian centre-right. Their leader will win the election easily, and on a manifesto that the General Election itself is the new referendum and a promise to remain (because by that time we will know how the EU plans to punish us). If you think this is far-fetched think about the position of centre-left and centre-right politicians at the moment: virtually all of whom (of course rightly) think that brexit will be an unmitigated disaster.

With Scotland the new 'north of the river' I've just realised that the HS2 rail project must go ahead will great speed - a bridge for our new state. We may have to pay Ruritania rent for the track but my word they are going to need the money.

yes but it is even MORE democratic to have a further referendum when we know what the conditions set by the EU will be for trade and residency, so I have signed. my guess is that THAT vote will be a landslide against. It is UNDEMOCRATIC to have a single referendum because it implies everyone stays the same and their vote is no longer of any interest.

Louisa, I think you underestimate two things. First, the palpable anger of our European allies (and allies in Europe have always been indispensable for our security). Thus the Polish representative in Brussels on TV last night was ENRAGED by the vote, rightly reminding his interviewer of his family's and his country's long history of helping and fighting for us. There are something like 1m Poles in the UK - you can understand his point. Your vote means they will be forced to go home. You think that what is left of the UK will be given a generous negotiation! Further, the fear of contagion - the UK must be presented as an example of the consequences of leaving to those who would like to follow to preserve what is left of the integrity of Europe. Second, the anger (and it is no exaggeration, sense of mourning) of the great majority of people in London (and in other cosmopolitan areas) who will now have to suffer the appalling consequences of atavistic Ruritania-ism (see Gellner's frightening book Nations and Nationalism on this). The general resentiment (sic) of many of those who voted to leave (which for the most part was against adverse conditions that membership of the EU ameliorated not made worse) was canalised into an fantasy of 'getting one's country back'. When the protection of the EU is gone and the adversity greatly increases (in a broken UK) the aggressivity of that vote will turn inwards in full scale reactionary force. We saw enough evidence of that potential in the referendum campaign itself. Meanwhile, thousands of job cuts were announced for London IN ONE DAY yesterday. There are, conservatively, twenty EU nationals working on building works just in my street at the moment - we just said go home to them too - not to mention the many hundreds of EU citizens who live and work in the lively polyglot and peaceful general area in which we have the privilege to live.

Could we have a serious discussion about an alliance with Scotland? We don't need a wall any more than they do - states are always virtual not geographical. The UK is clearly breaking up: why should we stay part of atavistic Ruritania?

James Barber Wrote: ---------------------------------------------------- > > Several of us felt a lot of angst had been > generated needlessly. I find this very symptomatic. Does Mr. Barber think those of us who felt a lot of "angst" had no reason to? One way of dismissing your critics, of course; but actually, for the record, I do not think my own "angst" was needless, so I signed a petition to say so.

There is a great recent novel (sic!) about life inside a bee colony - The Bees by Lalline Paull. One of the best novels I've read this year and made me want to be far more focused on making my garden bee friendly.

A ridiculous scheme. Worse, I will be directly affected but have still had no official information or consultation of any kind. ED_Moots, I'm in total agreement with you. I wonder really how this proposal saw the light of day - it is so obviously flawed.

perhaps they have just moved out for the winter. I visited a friend in a Warwickshire village a couple of weeks ago and there were about 200 (so it seemed) sparrows in a large bush but this was adjacent to farm land lying fallow. I wonder if they move out of town if it is as mild as it has been and go to exposed fields (perhaps because plenty of insects but I suspect mainly for their absolute favourite mud baths). they are the most socially organised of birds, second only perhaps to starlings. I was amazed by the division of labour I saw in the flock that used to visit me when I lived in Kennington: look-outs, child-minders, foragers, scouts, leaders. Once I had a sparrow-hawk dive bomb the garden: the sparrows alerted by the lookouts, it missed and, looking not a little sheepish, flew away.

kford Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The solution is to create uncertainty and > encourage eye contact between motorists and > pedestrians. > This is the essence of the matter. As a pedestrian I need to be woken up at this junction and as a driver I need to be made uncertain. The problem is that as a pedestrian I am so used to being molly-coddled in LL that I just walk without thinking. As a driver the absence of control is tacitly taken as an invitation to go forward blithely. Rationally, this really is a problem induced by too much regulation - but the only practical answer we can collectively imagine is more regulation. That is a one way street. What in fact is the evidence of accident incidence in those European towns that have abolished all road markings together with the difference between roads and pavements?

se22cat, I agree with you about concrete (although one always has also to mention cats). To be honest there is also a corvid factor. I think a lot of this is change in the ecosystem: it may just be that some species are better adapted to the changes in the environment, e.g. it is warmer than 20 years ago and MUCH less air pollution (no lead in petrol etc). For example, corvids (the most intelligent of species :-) ) tend to live in a different dimension to other birds. I have two jays, sundry magpies, and even crows visiting my garden. They of course eat the eggs of the smaller birds but that is what they do. In these circumstances only the canny smaller birds (robins, blue tits, black tits, wagtails and - actually, for me, goldfinches) increase. The feral pigeons (huge increase in these) take any table food instantly. Woodpigeons are on the increase. There is even a woodpecker occasionally, and recently a heron (!). Blackbirds (the most neurotic of species even if they sing well) have long gone as they are ground feeders that cats attack (and foxes will destroy their nests). I think the blue tits exploited the weather this year and had about five broods including into late November - their population has really exploded and it should be a law to bring back foil capped glass milk bottles.

James, I see the coalition have reduced the Southwark central government grant by 5.9% for 2015-6 (list of grant reductions announced today are on the bbc news website). This seems like an enormous change for year on year. From your point of view what are the likely effects of this going to be on local services? Which services are most likely to be cut if the forthcoming council tax review is kept below 2% (as also required unless local referendum) or will Southwark be able to increase its revenue from other sources?