Nick Jardine said:
I am determined to make a fight of it for the sake of the UK’s future – that’s certainly how I see it.
To me it makes absolute logical sense for the UK to be free of the slow slide into a Federal States of Europe and let’s be clear – that is where it is heading.
If at the end of this exhausting shambles we do actually end up staying in the EU ( or some form of Brexit in name only) then there will be no Status Quo, we will be drawn inextricably into greater union and eventually we will have to surrender our currency, identity and armed forces into a foreign power. I for one wish to retain the Queen as our Sovereign and not some unelected bureaucratic President!
A good friend of mine said to me; when I told her I had been selected, that the problem with the Brexit Party is its name – it should be called ‘The Common Sense Party’ and I know what she means. What do we stand for after the Brexit issue is finally resolved?
Well there is certainly a lot of common sense required in what is to be done! I think the farrago of decision making and counter productive arguments we have witnessed in Westminster over the past few years clearly illustrates that we are in desperate need of reform in our political and legal system.
We need to ensure that there is a clearly defined boundary between the Judiciary and Government, that the Upper House is reformed into a properly accountable and representative body and the role of the speaker is codified rather than relying on century old traditions – and that’s just for starters! We may even need the odd referendum along the way but first we would need to ensure that these are legally binding!
One of the aspects of this prolonged debate I find most annoying is the portrayal in the media that the result of the referendum in 2016 was marginal. I believe this stems from the difference in manner in which we hold general elections against a referendum. In other words ‘First Past the Post’ v ‘Proportional Representation’.
In a General Election the total number of votes cast for each party is hardly ever quoted – instead we talk of the number of seats won or the majority of a particular party with anything over a 100 seats being classed as a ‘landslide’.
Well in the 2016 referendum, 9 out of 12 of the UK regions voted to leave – that’s 75% in my book.
Had we expressed it in terms of the constituency seats, Leave would have won by well over a 100 – a Landslide indeed!
A few percentage points splitting the vote was exactly what should have been expected for a binary question with a Yes/No answer rather than the nuanced voting of a General Election spread over multiple parties and even then a split of a few percentage points between parties is quite common. So why has everyone in the Media and Westminster become fixated on the 52/48 margin. Because it paints a better picture for those who wish to remain – that’s why! Imagine the outcry if a Landslide victory for Leave had been treated with the same distain over the last three and a half years instead of it being portrayed as a plucky band of righteous minded MP’s fighting for the wishes of nearly half of the country!
The underlying point is in my mind that we need a parity of representation regardless of what question is being asked. One of the major problems we still face is that the make up in Westminster does not reflect the outcome of the referendum.
Perhaps it is time to use proportional representation for the election of our MP’s? I know this would be supported by the minority parties but I suspect it would not find favour with the others! And that brings me full circle back to why I am standing for the Brexit Party in this election – to try and rectify this balance.