What Boris’s Brexit cabinet has in store if you vote Leave

 

I published this three days ago. Now the reality is upon us!

WITH less than 36 hours until the polls open for the EU Referendum, most political observers admit the outcome of the vote is too close to call.

Today the Daily Telegraph’s daily poll of polls has the Remain vote at 48% and Leave at 52%, despite a recent surge of support for Remain.

The UK’s leading polling analyst Professor John Curtice of Strathclyde University said the Prime Minister must now be feeling discomfort at the thought that the outcome really could be in doubt.

Most pundits agree that if the Brexiteers do win the day it will lead to the swift resignations of David Cameron and George Osborne.

The likely successor as Prime Minister will be right wing Uxbridge and South Ruislip MP Boris Johnson.

Already national broadsheet newspapers have predicted the likely members of Johnson’s post referendum Brexit cabinet – a cabinet more right wing than any, since the days of Margaret Thatcher.

According to the voting record of Johnson’s likely top table of Michael Gove, Iain Duncan Smith, Andrea Leadsom, Liam Fox, Theresa May, Graham Brady and Theresa Villiers it would head a Government which is in favour of:

• new nuclear weapons
• academy schools
• fox hunting
• the Bedroom Tax
• cutting welfare benefits
• university tuition fees
• privatising the NHS
• curtailing immigration
• more restrictive regulation of trade unions
• ignoring measures to prevent climate change

If you are now unsure how to vote… according to the Hansard voting records on the website They Work For You, this is exactly how these likely post Brexit cabinet members have voted in the House of Commons on some key issues:

Boris Johnson – Prime Minister

Consistently voted:

against the hunting ban

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

against higher taxes on banks

for academy schools

against measures to prevent climate change

Generally voted:

for more restrictive regulation of trade unions

for a stricter asylum system

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

 

Michael Gove – Deputy Prime Minister

Consistently voted:

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

for academy schools

for university tuition fees

for a stricter asylum system

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

Almost always voted: for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

Generally voted:

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

for reforming the NHS

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Andrea Leadsom – Chancellor

Consistently voted:

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

for reforming the NHS

for university tuition fees

for a stricter asylum system

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

Almost always voted:

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

for academy schools

Generally voted:

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Liam Fox – Home Secretary

Consistently voted:

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

Almost always voted:

against the hunting ban

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

for reforming the NHS

Generally voted:

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

for academy schools

for a stricter asylum system

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Theresa May – Foreign Secretary

Consistently voted :

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

Almost always voted:

against the hunting ban

replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

for academy schools

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

Generally voted for:

reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

for more restrictive regulation of trade unions

for reforming the NHS

for a stricter asylum system

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Iain Duncan Smith – Work and Pensions Secretary

Consistently voted:

against the hunting ban

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

for more restrictive regulation of trade unions

for reforming the NHS

for academy schools

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

Almost always voted: for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

Generally voted:

for a stricter asylum system

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Graham Brady – Education Secretary

Consistently voted:

against the hunting ban

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

against a tax on the value of expensive homes (mansion tax)

for more restrictive regulation of trade unions

for reforming the NHS

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

for academy schools

Generally voted:

For a stricter asylum system

against measures to prevent climate change

 

Theresa Villiers – Health Secretary

Consistently voted:

for replacing Trident with new nuclear weapons

for reforming the NHS

for university tuition fees

for a stricter asylum system

Almost always voted:

against paying higher benefits for those unable to work due to illness or disability

for a reduction in spending on welfare benefits

voted for academy schools

Generally voted:

for reducing housing benefit for tenants deemed to have excess bedrooms (bedroom tax)

for more restrictive regulation of trade unions

for stronger enforcement of immigration rules

 

•  In addition to the above voting records, each of the MPs have also voted in favour of military interventions in other countries, fracking for shale gas, the privatisation of the Royal Mail and for the rights of the police and secret services to have complete access to anyone’s electronic communications.

Now you know what’s in store if you vote Leave.

Come you masters of war… I just want you to know I can see through your masks

AS a lifelong pacifist I have regularly argued on this blog against our ongoing glorification of war and imperial aggression.
Last November I published a piece entitled: I Saw That His Face Looked Just Like Mine, which chided the charade of Remembrance Sunday and the wearing of red poppies.
For the millions of wearers of these poppies they believe it is a good and noble cause to remember “those who died to protect our freedom”.
I too mourn the loss of these soldiers’ lives, but I also mourn the loss of the lives of soldiers from Germany, Italy, Ireland, Iraq, Argentina, North and South Korea, Afghanistan, Russia and many other countries.
And I mourn the 142 million innocent men, women and children killed in these wars.
I stand by the line of Wilfred Owen’s famous World War 1 poem: To children ardent for some desperate glory, the old Lie; Dulce et Decorum est Pro patria mori.
To translate from the Latin: the old lie: It is sweet and right to die for your country.
Why should dying for one’s country be a sweet, right, noble and heroic thing to do?
Because some warriors once drew lines in the earth determining where a country begins and ends?
Or because some politician or monarch has ordered you to fight?
Or because your skin is a different colour to someone else’s… or you speak a different language?
I published the words to Bob Dylan’s song John Brown, which in a simple narrative explodes the glory and hypocrisy of war.
I also published a short poem called Red or White, which explains why each November I wear a white poppy.
The white poppy is an ongoing challenge to the continuing drive to war.
And lest we forget, there is a message of support for Remembrance Sunday from the world’s second largest arms manufacturer, BAE Systems, conveniently sited in the underground station below Portcullis House where Members of Parliament have their offices and round the corner from the Cenotaph.
You see, making war is a big and highly profitable business; little wonder then that financiers, manufacturers, trade unions and of course the military and now the growing band of support charities are loath to call for peace and disarmament instead demanding more body armour, tougher boots and more helicopters to rescue the wounded.
The irony lies heavily, because 100 years ago the distinguished economist JA Hobson, neither socialist nor pacifist, saw World War 1 as rational only for the capitalist ruling classes who stood to benefit from the “ever-worsening burden of armaments”.
Many critics of the war also understood that it was being waged for stakes outside Europe in great tracts of colonised land in Asia and Africa.
While it is necessary to acknowledge the sacrifices made by soldiers from these regions, it is dishonest to assimilate them into the popular narrative of “everybody’s war for freedom”.
These were colonised subjects whose war this was certainly not, and in whose countries Britain was doing anything but defending freedom – its own occupying troops as unwelcome as German ones in Belgium.
So in January this year I had another pop at the glorification of war in a piece ironically entitled Dulce et Decorum Est.
My article came after Conservative Education Secretary Michael Gove defended the 100th anniversary ‘celebrations’ of the start of World War 1, publicly demeaned respected historians, then rewrote history himself by stating how the four years of carnage was indeed a ‘Great War’.
But why exactly, Mr Gove, are we using £50 million of public money to commemorate a catastrophe from which, in 2014, there are no survivors?
And if we honour the fallen Allied soldiers of the 1914-18 conflict, will we do the same for the German soldiers or indeed the dead of the Crimean War, Waterloo, the Boer War, the battles of Bannockburn and Culloden or the dead from the English Civil War, Agincourt, Crecy or even the Battle of Hastings?
Where does logic and reality stop and politics and propaganda begin?
And does Mr Gove really know the difference between the Dardanelles and the Somme?
The reasons given for this year’s World War 1 commemoration is that yet again we must remember our dead. “They died for us and our freedom. The cost of sacrifice. Remember Passchendaele. Never forget.”
As a child I remember sitting on my Great Uncle Jack’s knee as he told me tales of the Somme and the mud, horror and death. He showed me the 11 inch scar on his back where a German sniper had almost taken his life as he crawled back to his trench from no man’s land. And he also told me of his older brother Bernet who died from typhus fever in the trenches at the Somme, like many thousands of his compatriots.
There was no glory, no heroism, just the mechanised slaughter of millions of young working class men.
As Wilfred Owen wrote: ‘the poetry is in the pity’.
In the four years of World War 1, Britain endured 658,700 fatalities, 2,032,150 wounded and 359,150 men missing in action. This adds up to total of over three million casualties from one side alone.
Add to this the four million fatalities from the German side and other civilian deaths, the total death toll was in excess of 16 million.
No glory, just death and suffering.
As Lloyd George, Prime Minister in 1916, said: “If the people really knew the truth the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don’t know and can’t know.”
Today the British Government stands out in Europe for its flag-waving jingoism in relation to the centenary. Most Europeans are more sophisticated.
The superb ‘In Flanders Fields Museum’ on the battlefield of Ypres/Passchendaele in Belgium presents the war as a collective human tragedy which we need to understand. A ‘Path of Peace’ runs along the old trench-lines of the Isonzo Front in Slovenia’s Julian Alps. The twinned towns of Newark in Britain and Emmendingen in Germany plan to recreate the 1914 Christmas Truce football match.
And there is much more: places, exhibits, and events which seek to present the war – causes, course, and consequences – as it really was, and to use the commemoration to foster internationalism and peace.
Public money should be used in ways that help us remember the victims, lament the waste, and learn the lessons.
Poetry is again central to how many people regard World War 1.
The No Glory in War movement has arranged a special night of poetry to commemorate Conscientious Objectors’ Day on 15 May.
They have lined up a fine array of speakers, including AL Kennedy, Blake Morrison, Michael Rosen, George Szirtes and Samuel West.
They’ll read from both their own work and that of the war poets and talk a bit about the No Glory campaign.
Given the recent attacks on the war poets by Mr Gove and the Tory Government-backed revisionist historians, it’s important to reclaim their centrality to our memory of that war.
The event is called Cold Stars Lighting – taken from Wilfred Owen’s poem (I Saw His Round Mouth’s Crimson)
So if you’re near London, why not go along. You can book tickets here: http://www.wegottickets.com/event/262403#.UwfWaYXiS8c
Check out this website too: http://www.ppu.org.uk/remembrance/index.html

Dulce et Decorum Est

AS Conservative Education Secretary Michael Gove crawls from the wreckage of his incoherent and indefensible ramblings of how World War 1 was indeed a Great War, why are we using £50 million of public money to commemorate a catastrophe, from which, in 2014, there are no survivors?
And if we honour the fallen Allied soldiers of the 1914-18 conflict, will we do the same for the German soldiers or indeed the dead of the Crimean War, Waterloo, the Boer War, the battles of Bannockburn and Culloden or the dead from the English Civil War, Agincourt, Crecy or even the Battle of Hastings?
Where does logic and reality stop and politics and propaganda begin?
And does Gove really know the difference between the Dardanelles and the Somme?
The reasons given for this year’s World War 1 commemoration is that we must remember our dead. “They died for us and our freedom. The cost of sacrifice. Remember Passchendaele. Never forget.”
As a child I remember sitting on my Great Uncle Jack’s knee as he told me tales of the Somme and the mud, horror and death. He showed me the 11 inch scar on his back where a German sniper had almost taken his life as he crawled back to his trench from no man’s land. And he also told me of his older brother Bernet who died from typhus fever in the trenches at the Somme, like many thousands of his compatriots.
I have my Uncle Jack’s pencil written letters from the front – and from hospital – at my side as I write this blog.
There was no glory, no heroism, just the mechanised slaughter of millions of young working class men.
As World War 1 poet Wilfred Owen wrote: ‘the poetry is in the pity’.
One example of the mindless killings occurred on the 24 and 25 September 1915 when the 4th Black Watch was decimated at Loos.
“Haig had ample warning that an unprepared attack by two untrained divisions was unlikely to succeed. And so the stage was set for a repetition of the charge at Balaclava. For the set-piece attack of the 11th Corps was as futile and foredoomed as that of the Light Brigade. There had been 12 battalions making the attack, a strength of just under ten thousand, and in the three and a half hours of the actual battle their casualties were 385 officers and 7,861 men. The Germans suffered no casualties at all.”
Little wonder the Germans called the battlefield “Leichenfeld (field of corpses) von Loos”.
Perhaps in war, it’s the names that count. Dead soldiers had no gravestones before the Great War, unless they were generals, admirals or emperors worthy of entombment in Saint Paul’s Cathedral or Les Invalides. The soldiers were simply dumped into mass graves.
At Waterloo, the remains of the dead were shipped back to England to be used as manure on the fields of Lincolnshire – sometimes tilled by their unsuspecting farmer sons. No posthumous glory for them.
It is perhaps easier to believe that the names will “live for evermore” even though hundreds of thousands of World War 1 British and French and Germans and Austrians and Irishmen in British uniform and Hungarians and Indians and Russians and Americans and Turks and even Portuguese have no graves at all.
The last words of Nurse Edith Cavell, shot in Brussels by the Germans for rescuing Allied soldiers behind enemy lines, are inscribed on her monument beside the National Gallery: “Patriotism is not enough.”
In the four years of World War 1, Britain endured 658,700 fatalities, 2,032,150 wounded and 359,150 men missing in action. This adds up to total of over three million casualties from one side alone.
Add to this the four million fatalities from the German side and other civilian deaths, the total death toll was in excess of 16 million. About two million deaths were from disease and infection.
No glory, just death and suffering.
Historian Phillip Knightley wrote that during the war: “More deliberate lies were told than in any other period of history, and the whole apparatus of the state went into action to suppress the truth”.
When war broke out in 1914, it did so to flag waving and patriotism. Men were promised honour, glory and a conflict over by Christmas.
This was the Great War, to end all wars!
These were times of great social inequality and disenfranchised boys from the poorest communities could, for the first time, be useful. The army offered food, clothing, camaraderie and the respect of the nation.
Enlistment was a collective endeavour – many battalions were made up of men from the same villages. They joined together and died together.
There was no way out. Not to join was cowardice – a treacherous act which would bring shame upon their family and nation.
And they would be fighting against an identifiable evil.
The British propaganda painted German Kaiser Wilhelm as the devil incarnate. The Daily Mail of 22 September 1914 portrayed him in separate reports as a “lunatic”, “madman”, “barbarian”, “monster”, and “modern Judas”.
The German soldier raped, mutilated and tortured. Stories of Hun atrocities in Belgium were front page news despite there being little proof of their occurrence.
The Times of 8 January, 1915, stated: “The stories of rape are so horrible in detail that their publication would seem almost impossible were it not for the necessity of showing to the fullest extent the nature of the wild beasts fighting under the German Flag.”
This was the absolute necessity of conflict; ironically the same necessity that Michael Gove now points to as he rewrites the history of the war and instills his own propaganda.
Cambridge history Professor Richard Evans accuses Mr Gove of gross oversimplification: “How can you possibly claim that Britain was fighting for democracy and liberal values when the main ally was Tsarist Russia? That was a despotism that put Germany in the shade and sponsored pogroms in 1903-1906.”
Unlike Germany – where male suffrage was universal – 40 per cent of those British troops fighting in the war did not have the vote until 1918.
“The Kaiser was not like Hitler, he was not a dictator… this was not Nazi Germany,” he added.
So when we read about the heroism of all those dead men, when we pause to consider their sacrifice we should remember also a propaganda system which romanticised and demonised, misled and obfuscated.
As Lloyd George, Prime Minister in 1916, said: “If the people really knew the truth the war would be stopped tomorrow. But of course they don’t know and can’t know.”
And what they don’t know, can’t hurt, can it, Mr Gove?

Dulce et Decorum Est
Bent double, like old beggars under sacks,
Knock-kneed, coughing like hags, we cursed through sludge,
Till on the haunting flares we turned our backs
And towards our distant rest began to trudge.
Men marched asleep.
Many had lost their boots But limped on, blood-shod.
All went lame; all blind;
Drunk with fatigue; deaf even to the hoots
Of tired, outstripped Five-Nines that dropped behind.
Gas! Gas! Quick, boys!
An ecstasy of fumbling,
Fitting the clumsy helmets just in time;
But someone still was yelling out and stumbling,
And floundering like a man in fire or lime…
Dim, through the misty panes and thick green light,
As under a green sea, I saw him drowning.
In all my dreams, before my helpless sight,
He plunges at me, guttering, choking, drowning.
If in some smothering dreams you too could pace
Behind the wagon that we flung him in,
And watch the white eyes writhing in his face,
His hanging face, like a devil’s sick of sin;
If you could hear, at every jolt, the blood
Come gargling from the froth-corrupted lungs,
Obscene as cancer, bitter as the cud
Of vile, incurable sores on innocent tongues,
My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est Pro patria mori.
Wilfred Owen
October 1917 – March 1918