Dave – The situation on both sides of the pond is more complex than just a single avenue of attack. The American voting machines, that are so unreliable, are used for in person voting which was the personal choice for the majority of Trump’s supporters in this election. Democrats were voting by post more than in any previous election due to taking the Covid 19 restrictions a lot more seriously. Trump tried to disrupt the postal votes by having postal sorting machines removed in some Democrat strongholds. There has been a concerted effort in the US to disenfranchise voters sometimes by removing voters from the registration rolls or by enacting new requirements for voter ID and also by closing or moving voting stations to leave voters stranded in lengthy queues. All of these tactics have been used to favour the Republican Party for well over a decade. The highly credible Investigative Journalist Greg Palast has been on the case and he has exposed evidence of this in his new book ‘How Trump stole 2020.’
It’s important to understand that some of the Republican backers were turning against Trump and actually supporting Biden. Why? While Trump energised the Republican base and still kept the money flowing to the wealthy, he was not into foreign engagement; no lucrative wars were initiated while he was in office. Although he was a loose cannon, he was not great for the Military Industrial Complex; sadly I think Biden will not hesitate to go to war! However, while there is no better way to hide voter fraud than to make a huge fuss about your opponent, the Democrats also played dirty. Their dirty tricks were focused on keeping Bernie Sanders from getting the Democratic nomination. It was better to have a mentally compromised hawk who would protect dirty money interests on the ticket than a Democratic Socialist fired up about free Healthcare, college tuition and workers rights; so they clubbed together to burn Bernie.
Here in the UK we do not use those electronic voting machines yet and I hope they do not get brought in by the Tories. The Tories are strongly committed to bringing in voter ID on the pretext of eliminating the type of voter fraud that is incredibly rare. They will try to introduce other forms of disenfranchisement that have worked well to cull the progressive vote in America. However, our wide open back door in the UK centres around the postal vote system, which is why Boris Johnson wanted a midwinter election and heavily encouraged voting by post as it worked well for them. One private company, Idox, with powerful ties to the Tory Party has control over a Postal Vote Management System that covers huge swaths of the UK. They have your name, address, date of birth and your signature on file; they have also created a handy App for Party canvassing, so they even know which party you vote for! Rigging is possible in a number of ways and the unfathomable Tory ‘landslide victory’ result made this a very strong possibility.
Send postal votes out late or not at all; there were valid complaints of this with overseas votes arriving far too late and students not getting their vote at all. Verification and possibly replacement of your ballot is all handled in house and since this is all privatized now there is zero oversight from Returning Officers or the Electoral Commission. For no logical reason regular and postal ballots are all mixed in together before counting so you cannot tell if the postal ballots for one particular area were stuffed. Cummings had a very acurate picture of exactly where extra votes were needed and how many were needed so that any ballot stuffing would not arouse too much suspicion. The accuracy and precision of his 80 seat promise that was miraculously delivered and the people like Raab and Kunnesberg who blurted out predictions they should not have known about were a dead give away, but this was drowned out by the confected credibility provided by Tory chums in the BBC bullying Labour MPs into endorsing their own fabricated defeat!
Only by Challenging and Investigating the Covert 2019 Rigged Election will we expose the gross insecurity of this privatised system. “A Watchdog that cannot Watch is just a Dog:” Sign this Petition to “Rescue our Watchdog” as “All Votes Must Count!”
What would have salvaged New Years Day as a joyful new beginning rather than a painful half century regression and the start of the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship? Astounding News of an arch greedy capitalist commiting to donate a record billion dollars towards ending global poverty with other equally selfish capitalist exploiters, not wishing to be outdone, competing to match or exceed that donation! But of course, that didn’t happen. For billionaires like Jeff Bazos who routinely exploit workers to rake in huge profits, the Covid crisis has presented a bonanza, massively accelerating their obscene wealth, but giving back to the community is not in their stone cold hearts. Globally there are a few super wealthy select individuals who are capable of ending global poverty in our lifetime by donating a fraction of their wealth, but they will choose to go to their graves clutching every last scrap of cash they can extort from the less fortunate. With that greed they have the blood of millions on their hands; that’s some legacy to exit the planet with!
When the first few New Year celebrations kicked off on the other side of the world New Zealand and Taiwan put on quite a show with their citizens liberated from Covid restrictions through the providence of wise leadership and smart governance. ‘Celebrations’ became a lot more muted and remote elsewhere with deserted streets and little to crow about. The UK was subjected to additional regretful tragedy as this wretched Tory Government finally managed to drag us out of the EU to begin their unfettered destruction of our democracy with no recourse to future justice. The only glimmer of hope I see was promoted in the Skwawkbox Article entitled, “Thirty thousand people sign up for live launch of Corbyn’s Peace and Justice Project.” They trumpeted the, “Huge popularity of former leader’s move will stick in craw of his attackers” saying that, “Jeremy Corbyn’s new Project for Peace and Justice has met with a huge welcome, with widespread support on the left, and local Labour parties already planning to affiliate.”
The Skwawkbox report that, “It has also met with bile and vitriol from his enemies, who remain eager to rewrite history and bury the memory of the movement he led and galvanised and its popularity. So the news today will come as bitterest gall to his enemies that tens of thousands of people have already signed up for the project’s live launch event, with almost three weeks still to go before it happens. The announcement was made on the PJP’s Facebook page: As well as Corbyn himself, the event will feature Zarah Sultana, one of the stars of Labour’s 2019 intake of MPs, Unite head Len McCluskey, leading Jewish ANC member Ronnie Kasrils, former NUT head Christine Blower, Yanis Varoufakis and climate campaigner Scarlet Westbrook. Those who have not yet registered for the event, which takes place from 3-4.30pm on Sunday 17 January, and wish to you can still do so” Register Here.”
The Left Foot Forward Article entitled, “Prof Prem Sikka: With their Brexit deal, the government has broken its promises to voters,” contains more sobering news. Sikka notes, “Johnson said we’d stay in the single market. The 85 page European Union (Future Relationship) Bill was rushed through the UK parliament last night, barely 24 hours after its publication. The Bill (now Act) relates to 1,246 pages of the Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) struck between the EU and UK and was published on Christmas Eve. The Constitutional Reform and Governance Act 2010 empowers governments to sign treaties. However, their incorporation into domestic law requires an Act of Parliament and hence the Bill. But this does not give Parliament the power to approve, reject or amend the treaty itself. Of course, parliamentary scrutiny may encourage governments to seek revisions to treaties.”
Sikka has anylized the daunting implications of the document he says, “The Act goes beyond the TCA. For example, clause 29 gives government powers to enact future laws without parliamentary approval.” We have known for some time that this was the single most dangerous component as it places supreme power in the hands of a thoroughly untrustworthy PM with absolute power over Parliament: this is the Tory Sovereign Dictatorship! Sikka says, “The government pushed the Bill through parliament without detailed scrutiny.” He elaborates on the broken promises of our deceitful PM and all of the things we will not be getting from the agreement. He says that, “In 2016, the UK electorate voted to leave the EU. It did not vote to come out of the single market. The two are not the same thing. For example, there are specific agreements with Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein, which permits them to be part of the single market even though they are not part of the EU. However, the UK government chose differently.”
Sikka outlines the minimalistic hard Brexit, saying, “The government reneged on many of the promises made over the years. For example, in 2016, Prime Minister Boris Johnson said that after Brexit ‘British people will still be able to go and work in the EU; to live; to travel; to study; to buy homes and to settle down … there will continue to be free trade, and access to the single market’. The TCA and the EU Act betray the promises. The TCA enables the UK to leave the EU with a deal. The alternative was to leave with no deal. The TCA enacts trade barriers, especially for the services sector which accounts for 50% of the UK exports. It reduces UK citizens’ mobility and restricts cultural exchanges amongst young people by withdrawal from the Erasmus programme. It damages livelihoods by failure to secure recognition of UK professional qualifications and will increase costs for everyone. Significantly, the TCA and the Bill were not accompanied by any sectoral or regional analysis of the impact of the EU Agreement.”
Sikka reports that, “The TCA commitment to fair competition and level-playing-field requires consideration of worker rights, taxation and other matters. Articles 6 and 9 of the TCA states that the EU and the UK workers’ rights will be aligned.” Sikka warns that, “This may be problematic as the UK is becoming a low-wage economy and is competing on cost and anti trade union sentiments rather than cooperation with workers. So the EU and the UK economic trajectories will differ and exert pressure on workers’ rights. The TCA calls for further negotiations of the issues and a ‘rebalancing’ which may culminate in termination of this part of the agreement. Tellingly, the UK government commentary on Labour and social standards states that ‘retained EU law will not have a special place on the UK’s statute books’.” This was the massive bear trap that I refuse to believe so many Labour voters willingly waked into: they did not vote Tory in the Covert 2019 Rigged Election, their votes were stolen and it still needs to be Investigated.
Sikka has more warnings for us saying that, “Taxation would be another point of friction. The level of taxes depends on the social settlements and democratic rights. Many EU countries spend more on social welfare. There is a concern that the UK is on the road to becoming a tax haven and attracting footloose capital with low tax rates. It may further shift taxes away from capital to workers and consumers or may remove some of the hard-won social rights altogether, a way of subsidising corporations. The TCA only commits the UK to minimum OECD tax standards on exchange of information, anti-tax avoidance and public country by country reporting by credit-institutions and investment firms. There are no provisions to constrain domestic tax regime or tax rates. So there is a potential for tax wars and the EU redesigning its tax laws to negate the UK impulses.” Potentially the EU could block this ‘race to the bottom’ by using an agreement over Financial Services as leverage.
Sikka reminds us that, “The Brexit project has invoked the emotive issue of sovereignty and independence. Sovereignty is essentially a resource used to achieve some goals. All international trade and security agreements require compromises. In that sense, no country prevails. The EU never reduced the UK’s sovereignty, any more than it affected the capacities of France or Germany. In fact, the UK enjoyed a veto on many issues. Now it will have to accept some EU rules without any say in approving them.” The whole concept of ‘sovereignty’ has been deviously manipulated by this Tory Government to imply that the EU was controlling the UK rather than the reality that we EU member states negotiated and collaborated on to agree a common set of policies that were mutually beneficial. However, we have now traded that diplomatic normality for what the British people were led to believe was a democratically elected Parliament consisting of MPs who represent us. With a fake 80 seat majority and a worthless opposition the Tories under Johnson who, with zero tolerance for descent, has absolute supreme power: a Sovereign Dictatorship.
Sikka notes that, “Brexit is based on the claim that it would enable the UK to control its territory and borders.” He warns, “That is also problematic. For example, Northern Ireland is subject to the full EU rules whilst the rest of the UK is not. Northern Ireland is set to become a state within a state. The TCA and the Act forms the basis of future relationship with the EU, but much is still to be negotiated. They contain numerous provisions for joint Committees, Councils and arbitration Panels to resolve disputes. These disputes may result in one or both sides terminating some part of the agreement and then possibly facing sanctions from the other party. In such matters, the UK will be in a weaker position as its economic and diplomatic resources are considerably less the EU’s.” Left Foot Forward report that, “Prem Sikka is an emeritus professor of accounting at the University of Essex and a Labour member of the House of Lords.”
In another revealing Left Foot Forward Article entitled, “These Tory ‘free port’ plans are just another handout to corporations and tax dodgers,” once again Prem Sikka warned us of problems ahead. On 14 February, 2020 they said that, “As the new Chancellor Rishi Sunak prepares to roll out up to ten new so-called ‘free ports’, Prof Prem Sikka breaks apart the arguments behind them.” Sikka paints a really grim, but realistic picture of the state our country has descended to. He said that, “The UK economy is stagnant. Wages are depressed, and the number of workers living in poverty has risen for third consecutive year. Some 14 million Brits are in poverty, more than one in five of the population, including four million children and two million pensioners.”
Sikka offered us a dire warning based on Tory policy so far, saying that, “The government’s response is not to end wage freezes, control rents and profiteering, restore local authority cuts or shackle tax avoidance by corporations and the rich. It has instead opted for deregulation and is proposing to create 10 so-called free ports across the UK. Free ports, similar to free trade zones or enterprise zone, are geographical locations, usually closer to seaports, riverports and airports, within the jurisdiction of a country, but outside the normal application of laws about customs duties, import/export, planning, construction, tax, business rates and labour. The claim is that tax concessions, deregulation and lower standards of rights/laws would attract investment, especially manufacturing, create high-skilled jobs and stimulate the economy by facilitating exports. There are approximately 3,500 freeports worldwide, employing 66 million people across 135 countries.”
Sikka explained that, “Free ports effectively function as a state within a state, and are supported by the Chancellor Rishi Sunak. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has claimed that the EU somehow prevented the UK from having free ports. This is untrue. The EU permits freeports within defined parameters so that they do not fall foul of the state-aid rules and fuel a race-to-the-bottom. There are about 80 free ports in EU member states. The UK government has been able to create free ports under section 100A of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979. Seven free ports operated in the UK at various points between 1984 and 2012. In 2011, the government created 24 new enterprise zones, which became operational in 2012. Then in July 2012, the government let the enabling Statutory Instrument lapse. Currently, the UK has 61 enterprise zones.”
Sikka further explained that, “After Brexit, the UK can set its own rules on free ports, but these will be circumscribed by trade agreements as no country will permit another to undermine its economic base through unfair state-aid. The UK may trade in accordance with the World Trade Organization (WTO) obligations, but they too impose rules to limit state-aid. Considerable claims are made about the creation of new jobs, but the Centre for Cities notes that by 2017, the total new jobs in the enterprise zones were only around one-quarter of the estimates produced by the Treasury. At least one-third of the jobs created came as a result of the move of businesses from elsewhere, rather than the creation of new posts in new businesses. Some 95% of the net new private sector jobs were low-skilled. So free ports and enterprise zones did not transform the UK economy into a higher-skilled economy.” Slave labour, working zero hours contracts, for pittance pay has always been a prime Tory objective!
Sikka warned that, “Free ports are not exactly a bonanza for new inward investment either. Investment tends to get shifted from elsewhere to take advantage of discounts, low taxes and regulation. It is possible for individuals and companies resident in the UK to route investment into freeports via offshore entities to exploit tax laws and retain anonymity. Despite the existence of ‘enterprise zones’, the UK has languished near the bottom of the EU table for investment in productive assets.” Tories hate this type of sound evidence as it can potentially scupper their planned exploitation of the system. Sikka warned, “The lax checks on the movement of money and goods make freeports a haven for smuggling, forgery, tax dodging and money laundering.” The ‘London Laundrymat’ is about to get a lot more dirty dhoby from around the globe and UK is already considered the money laundering capital of the world,
Sikka highlighted, “An EU report noted that ‘Free ports are conducive to secrecy. With their preferential treatment, they resemble offshore financial centres, offering both high security and discretion and allowing transactions to be made without attracting the attention of regulators or direct tax authorities’.” The report added: “Goods entering free ports are not subject to customs duties. Goods sold in the free ports are not subject to value added tax. No withholding tax is collected on capital gains, though sellers may need to report to the tax authority in the country where they are tax resident’. Free ports create huge cross-subsidisation. Individuals and businesses located outside free ports pay taxes which fund the social infrastructure such as roads, railways, education, healthcare, pensions, security, legal system and clean air. But the entities located within the free ports pay little or nothing towards the use of such infrastructure. Unsurprisingly, free ports are attractive to corporations.”
Sikka said that regarding free ports the report concludes, “they lead to unfair competition. The entities residing in free ports benefit from subsidies whilst their competitors located in the main economy do not receive the same inducements.” Sikka remarked that, “Free ports are part of the government’s obsession with deregulation and are unlikely to deliver durable economic stability or prosperity. They deflect attention away from the need to invest in all regions and sections of the economy. Given the Tories’ record, it’s no surprise that many fear a Johnson administration would use free ports to erode workers’ rights.” This component of Tory policy is all about maximizing exploitation of ordinary citizens with the working poor driven into destitution while the wealthy elite create new tax havens closer to home, beyond the prying eyes of the EU. The hard Brexit, forced on us with a last ditch Bill there was no time to scrutinize and no options, will further enable gross exploitation by our empowered Tory Sovereign Dictatorship. DO NOT MOVE ON!