Votes for Life – Next Steps – Update 23 March 2023

Votes for Life – Next Steps – Update 23 March 2023

Mar 27, 2023 | News, Votes for Life

On 23 March 2023, Bremain Chair Sue Wilson attended a meeting at the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) to discuss the restoration of full democratic voting rights to Britons living abroad.

The meeting was with the Head of the Secondary Legislation, Elections Registration and Franchise Dept. along with 2 members of the team, at the Home Office in Westminster.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the next steps, the process and to establish the timescale. This is what we learned ……….

 

Secondary legislation

In order to restore full voting rights following the passing of the Elections Act by Parliament, secondary legislation will be necessary. This will take place in the Autumn session of parliament 2023 and will effectively be wrapped up by next January. The timing has been scheduled specifically to ensure that everything is in place ahead of a potential general election in the spring of 2024.

 

Improvements to the registration process

To facilitate voting arrangements, the process of registration will be made simpler, and the frequency of re-registration will be extended from 1 year to (up to) 3 years. An online registration service will be complemented by the introduction of an online absent vote (postal or proxy) application process.

As soon as the secondary legislation has passed, registration will begin immediately. We will then be encouraging our members to act quickly, rather than wait until an election is announced.

The franchise of eligible voters will be extended to include all of the following British citizens, regardless of how long they have been living abroad:

  • those previously registered to vote in the UK
  • those previously resident in the UK

In addition, those that left the UK before they were old enough to register to vote will no longer have to rely on the registration status of their parents/guardians.

 

The verification process

The process will require the verification of both personal identity and a previous UK address.

Regarding identity verification, documentary evidence could be provided by a NI number or a UK passport. Failing that, an attestation (a declaration that certain facts are true) from a suitably qualified registered elector (not a close family member) would be acceptable.

Re address verification, if it is not possible for an Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) to verify an address by a register check, other options will be available, such as documentary evidence from a bank, building society, utility company, tax office or a variety of other organisations. A full list is available online (see below). Failing that, an attestation – as with ID verification – would be acceptable.

Following the meeting, Sue said, “I came away from the meeting impressed with the level of detail provided, the comprehensive nature of the planning and preparation, and the understanding of the issues we face as overseas voters. I was impressed with the knowledge and abilities of the people I met and with their willingness to engage with us and to listen to our concerns. Now, bring on the next election, but not before next spring, please!”

For further information, go to the government website here

Overseas electors: Delivering ‘votes for life’ for British expatriates here

Bremainers Ask – Siobhan Benita

Bremainers Ask – Siobhan Benita

Mar 1, 2023 | Bremainers Ask, News

Siobhan Benita was a former senior civil servant who left Whitehall to campaign for better politics.  Passionately opposed to Brexit, she joined the Lib Dems on the morning of the EU Referendum result and became a leading voice in their anti-Brexit movement.  Now politically homeless again, she remains active on social media and spoke at the first National Rejoin March in Autumn 2022.  Siobhan has a French husband and two bilingual daughters.

David Eldridge: Do you foresee the UK rejoining the EU? If so, what would be the timescale and steps on the way?

I absolutely foresee the UK re-joining the EU. As time passes, the economic damage that Brexit has caused for the UK will become increasingly obvious and fewer and fewer people will be prepared to defend it (or even admit they voted for it). We are already seeing a shift in the narrative with papers like The Telegraph and Daily Mail running articles highlighting some of the negative consequences of Brexit. In addition, pressure for the UK to re-join will come from younger generations as they reach voting age and want to access all the freedoms that we previously enjoyed as part of EU membership.

Given that I would like us to re-join the EU tomorrow, the timescale will never be as quick as I want but I do think it’s possible for it to happen in a matter of years rather than decades. In terms of the main steps along the way, the immediate priority is to get the Tories out with tactical voting at the next general election. I also believe that we desperately need electoral reform and a move to a more proportional system should ensure that we never again have a government with so much power but so little reflection of the voting public as a whole.

Mike Phillips: The Retained EU law bill will scrap thousands of EU laws, many of which were proposed by the UK and all of which were scrutinised by them. This imposes a massive task on civil servants. How do you view the risk of lack of Parliamentary scrutiny resulting in loss of previously agreed common standards?

The Retained EU Law Bill is going to impose huge burdens on already stretched civil servants as they attempt to meet the Government’s deadline to review all EU legislation by the end of 2023. As a former civil servant myself, I can honestly say that the amount of resource that this needless and entirely self-inflicted exercise will require – at a time when the civil service needs to be tackling huge challenges such as post-Covid, economic recovery, getting our public services back on track or meeting our climate change obligations – is both absurd and indefensible.

The fact that the Bill will allow ministers to revoke and replace EU laws with little or no parliamentary scrutiny is a major concern. Not only is this undemocratic but it will also create serious uncertainty for all stakeholders, including employers, businesses, regulators etc. And let’s not forget, that all of this effort will, ultimately, either produce no change or will actually create new red tape and regulatory burdens, especially for people who still want to trade or work with EU organisations. It’s bonkers.

Michael Soffe: Where, oh where, can those of us who feel “politically homeless” turn to? Do you see the creation of a serious full-on, rejoin party ever being created and funded?

 This is the million-dollar question that I have been asking myself for years now! I am optimistic that a serious, re-join party will emerge over time. Indeed, as polls increasingly show that a growing majority of the public now believe Brexit was a mistake, the creation of a mainstream re-join party is surely a matter of when, not if. Whether this will be a new party or, for example, a future Labour party dropping its ridiculous and unsustainable “make Brexit work” stance, I’m not so sure.

In the meantime, there are many ways that politically homeless campaigners like myself can engage, including: amplifying the voices of individuals who do publicly advocate for re-join, supporting the ReJoin Party and other fledgling movements in their grassroot efforts and taking part in movements like the National Re-join March, which took place in London in Autumn last year and which will be touring the country over the coming months. Despite its many flaws, social media has helped me to connect with other re-joiners and to keep the re-join narrative going. It can be exhausting and disheartening campaigning for something you feel so strongly about when every day the Government seems intent on taking the UK further down a nationalistic path and Labour isn’t prepared to call out Brexit for the disaster that it is, so being part of a re-join community (even a virtual one) helps to keep me energised and sane!

Anon: If you could take over the job of PM, with so many pressing issues facing the country, where would you start?

As PM, my first priority would be to bring about electoral reform. Our two-party system is broken and is no longer serving the national interest or reflecting how the public actually feel and vote. I would also prioritise reforming parliament. We have seen under the Tories that Ministers can break the ministerial code and the Nolan Principles of Public Life with little or no consequences and that must change if we want better politics and better politicians. The Lords also needs reform. There should, for example, be transparency around appointment decisions and fixed terms replacing lifelong peerages.

With regard to policy, I’d initiate a fundamental shift in funding with more resource going into prevention, such as early years provision and public health because this would create more efficient and effective public services in the medium to long term. And, given that tackling climate change is by far the single biggest challenge facing us today, I would require every policy to be considered through a net zero lens.

Peter Corr: The pro EU community is said to be “full of old white people”. Do you feel this to be true, and if so, what can we do to promote the Rejoin campaign to a wider, more diverse community to win support?

Unfortunately, the accusation that the pro-EU community is “full of old white people” can sometimes feel justified when you look at who – traditionally – the most prominent pro-EU individuals have been. That said, there are some fantastic, high-profile campaigners such a Femi Oluwole and Marina Purkiss who certainly don’t conform to the stereotype. The other accusation that I hear quite often is that the pro-EU community is very middle class.

The bottom line for me is that Brexit will make everyone in the UK poorer, regardless of age, ethnicity or class background. And, whilst Brexiteers were sadly quite successful at persuading many voters that they would be better off post Brexit, the lies are now beginning to crumble and the economic reality is becoming clear. As with any issue, the pro-EU movement will be stronger and more impactful if it is inclusive, reflecting the UK’s diverse population. As we edge towards the possibility of re-joining the EU, having clearer messages, delivered by a wide range of people, on how this will benefit everyone will be crucial and the work to engage communities and community leaders should be happening now.

Lisa Burton: I note that you joined the Liberal Democrats on the morning of the Brexit Referendum result, as they were the only party with a clear rejoin message at that point. How do you feel now about how the party handled Brexit and their position now?

 This is a tough question for me to answer because I have a lot of friends in the Liberal Democrats. We desperately need a strong, centre-ground party in the UK and I would like to see the Lib Dems doing well in the next election. All that said, however, I am extremely disappointed in the way they handled Brexit and in their current position.

In the run up to the referendum the Lib Dems were so unequivocal in their pro-EU stance. Their “Bollocks to Brexit” approach gained them profile and traction, and consequently they were successful in getting 19 MEPs elected to the European Parliament in 2019. In contrast, Lib Dem MPs today are virtually indistinguishable from Labour in their stance on Brexit. I understand the thinking; where the Lib Dems see their best chances of winning seats at the next election, they are largely Tory-facing. Nevertheless, I believe they have made a strategic error in rowing back from their clear, pro-EU position.

As a party, they are currently at around 9% in the polls and this hasn’t budged since we left the EU, despite their reticence to talk about Brexit. Unlike Labour, they need to take some risks. There was an opportunity to be seized in scooping up the millions of people like myself (and disillusioned Labour and Tory voters) who are desperate to throw support behind a serious a re-join force but the party chose not to seize it. What a shame.

Next month: Russ Jones is an author and political commentator with over 277k followers on Twitter ( @RussInCheshire) where he regularly reports on #TheWeekInTory. He is currently writing the sequel to his book ‘The Decade in Tory’. The new book will be entitled ‘Four Chancellors and a Funeral”.

If you wish to submit a question for consideration, please email it to us enquiries@bremaininspain.com no later than 8 March.

Give me back my vote!

Give me back my vote!

Feb 27, 2023 | Bylines, News

Millions of disenfranchised Brits living abroad care deeply about British politics and would like to have their vote back now, writes Bremain Chair Sue Wilson MBE for Yorkshire Bylines.

The Conservatives are in trouble. They are running scared and hoping we won’t notice. Millions of potential voters across the country, and further afield, are desperate to oust them democratically at the next election. The question is, will they let us?

 

Elections Act not all bad news

When the Elections Act became law in April 2022, it caused justifiable outrage, especially regarding new voter ID requirements. Supposedly designed to prevent voter fraud at the ballot box, it was a solution in search of a non-existent problem. As a result, millions of people are likely to be disenfranchised from voting, most especially the young. The fact that young people are less likely to vote Conservative may just be a coincidence. Or not.

But what the Elections Act took away with one hand, it gave back with another. Hidden behind the bad news was some good news for British citizens living abroad. For years the government pledged in multiple manifestos to return democratic voting rights to Brits overseas. The rule that excluded emigrants from voting in UK elections after 15 years abroad was finally being rescinded. British citizens living abroad would finally be able have their say at the polling booths. Well, almost.

More hoops to jump through for disenfranchised British emigrants

Before disenfranchised British emigrants are able to vote in forthcoming elections, secondary legislation is required. Until recently that legislation was promised this summer, with a view to restoring expatriate voting rights ahead of the next general election. However, the most recent correspondence from the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities (DLUHC) confirmed that the timing of that legislation has already slipped.

In recent correspondence, the DLUHC stated an intention “that legislation will be implemented to facilitate registration of eligible British citizens from Autumn 2023”. Many Brits abroad, anxious to take advantage of restored voting rights as soon as possible, will be questioning whether further delays are likely. That’s without their considerable concerns that necessary changes won’t be implemented in time for the next general election.

In order to vote, it will be necessary to register to do so and to be assessed for eligibility. According to the DLUHC it is also “imperative that voters and those who administer our elections have sufficient time to understand the new rules and to prepare accordingly”. So, no rush then.

To vote or not to vote

Ministerial responsibility for overseas voters has recently passed to Lee Rowley MP. His answers to questions in the House of Commons recently did not instil confidence.

With local elections just ten weeks away, MP Helen Morgan raised questions about the rollout of voter ID. In response, Rowley disputed the numbers of voters likely to be disenfranchised suggesting that many who were unable to vote wouldn’t have chosen to do so anyway. He added that the purpose of a democracy was for people to “have both the right to vote and not to vote”.

Millions of British citizens abroad, and young people at home, may well be desperate to exercise that right to vote but be unable to do so thanks to government actions, or lack of them.

 

Strong connections to the UK

When the restoration of overseas voting rights was first included in their manifesto, the government likely expected a grateful overseas audience to reward them at the next election. Post-Brexit, if they have any self-awareness at all, they’ll now understand that things may have changed. Many Brits living in Europe were hugely affected by the consequences of Brexit. Bad enough if you voted against it but intolerable if you were prevented even from doing that.

But the battle to have our voice in British politics has not just been with the government. There was also opposition from members of the British public suggesting those that chose to live abroad should have no say in UK politics. That message is still being heard, unlike ours.

Whether Brits back home like it or not, connections with the UK – even for those that haven’t lived there for years – remain strong. For many that connection is family. For others it could be work, property, taxes, pension, or even military service. For many it is deep routed feelings of identity. You can take the person out of the country, you can’t often take the country out of the person. Much as we might want to at times when witnessing the destruction of a country increasingly difficult to recognise.

 

Honouring Harry Shindler OBE

Whatever the reason for strong connections with the UK, it’s also about UK politics. Decisions made by the British government affect lives of all British citizens, regardless of where they choose to live. To have previously valued rights and freedoms taken away by a government we can’t even vote for, or against, is painful. Not to mention undemocratic.

Citizens’ rights groups all over Europe have campaigned tirelessly to enable disenfranchised Brits abroad to once again have their say in British politics. That campaign was started over 25 years ago by veteran campaigner, Harry Shindler OBE. Sadly, at the age of 101 years Harry died this week, unable to cast his British vote one last time. Though at least he did live long enough to see the law finally changed.

According to the government’s own impact assessment, there are over 3.5 million eligible British voters living abroad. It is up to all of us to keep up the fight until the last ‘i’ is dotted and ‘t’ is crossed. We owe it to Harry to finish the job he started and to use our votes to tell this government what we really think of them. They are probably not going to like it!

 

 

Secret Summit admits Brexit isn’t working

Secret Summit admits Brexit isn’t working

Feb 15, 2023 | Bylines, News

Was this secret summit the first tentative step towards reversing the unmitigated disaster that is Brexit? We can only hope, writes Bremain Chair Sue Wilson MBE for West England Bylines.
 

 

On Thursday and Friday last week (9-10 February), a cross-party ‘secret summit’ on Brexit was held at Ditchley Park in Oxfordshire. The meeting, which included high-level politicians from both Remain and Leave camps, as well as prominent businessmen, was so ‘secret’ that by Sunday it was all over mainstream media.

The meeting was entitled: “How can we make Brexit work better with our neighbours in Europe?” In an introductory statement, it was acknowledged that “so far the UK has not yet found its way forward outside the EU”. Not only that, but Brexit is “acting as a drag on our growth and inhibiting the UK’s potential”.

The news brought hope to pro-Europeans that perhaps, at last, politicians of all persuasions were willing to discuss the failings of Brexit, and our future relationship with Europe, with some openness and honesty. Brexiteers, on the other hand, were screaming “sell-out”.

Brexiteer response

Brexit-supporting backbench MP, John Redwood, was quick to complain on Twitter. “Instead of talking of sell-out at private conferences”, he said, “the UK establishment needs to complete Brexit and use its freedoms.” He added that the government should pass the Protocol bill to make Northern Ireland fully part of the UK and in order to “take back full control of our fish for starters”. Not sure what he had in mind for the main course.

Former UKIP leader, Nigel Farage, said the “full sellout of Brexit was under way”, adding that the Tory party had “never believed in it”. Deputy Chairman of the ERG, David Jones, said the fact that the meeting was held in secret raised suspicions that the aim was to have “closer constitutional links” with Europe. Let’s hope so!

Brexit is unravelling, says Frost

Despite walking away from his Brexit role, and taking no responsibility for his wonderful, then awful, Brexit deal, Lord Frost is never one to miss an opportunity to supply unwanted advice and comment. Again. Ad infinitum.

Frost accused those senior politicians taking part – such as Michael Gove, David Lammy, Peter Mandelson and David Liddington – of wanting to “unravel the deals we did to exit the EU in 2020” and to “stay shadowing the EU instead”. He said that the government, which had been elected with a huge Brexit mandate, needed to “fully and enthusiastically embrace” the advantages of Brexit, adding that “Brexit doesn’t need ‘fixing’”.

Despite his former – and now hard to believe Remainer – beliefs, Frost spends a lot of effort looking for ways to criticise those tasked with delivering Brexit. If he spent half as much time searching for mythical Brexit benefits, he might be more useful. Or at least, more muted.

The Downing Street position

A spokesman for Downing Street stated that PM Rishi Sunak had been unaware of the summit meeting held last week. It was a response that surprised no one as Sunak often seems ‘unaware’ of activities going on right under his nose. On a trip to Oldham, Sunak said he was “proud to vote for Brexit” and that, as PM, he was “keen to make sure we deliver the benefits”.  Whatever they may be. If he knows, he’s not telling.

With the UK and EU edging closer to an agreement, and Sunak saying little about his plans for the controversial Protocol Bill, no doubt Lord Frost, the ERG and Brexiteers will be watching him closely for further signs of “unravelling”. They are also pushing for the tearing up of thousands of EU laws, under the Retained EU Law bill.

Sunak may try to give with one hand and take with the other, in an effort to please all parties – not least US President Biden – over Brexit and the Protocol. But this will just further cement opinion that he is ineffective and indecisive.

 

What did the summit achieve?

If the meeting itself didn’t stay secret for long, the outcome of the discussions may take longer to surface. A confidential source described the meeting as “constructive”, saying that the “main thrust of it was that Britain is losing out, that Brexit it not delivering, our economy is in a weak position.” 

The aim was to move on “from Leave and Remain”, to discuss “the issues we now have to face” and how to get into “the best position” for having a conversation with the EU about changes to the UK-EU trade and cooperation agreement. That agreement is subject to renewal, revision or termination every five years. The current deal expires, and is up for renegotiation, in 2025, so getting into the “best position” soon is vital.

While it’s shocking that it has taken this long, the fact that Tory and Labour politicians – on both sides of the Brexit debate – are now having grown-up conversations (we assume), is a step forward. Considering the extensive and obvious damage that Brexit has wreaked, better late than never.

However, there is still a long way to travel. Despite the participants seeming acceptance that Brexit is failing, and a huge shift in public opinion, both Tories and Labour still seem to want to “make Brexit work”. They can’t.

They can tinker around the edges. They can work more closely with Europe where there is common ground. They can even work together to improve the Protocol. But they cannot “make Brexit work”.

Until there is a ‘secret summit’ to discuss re-joining the Single Market, the Customs Union or the EU itself, then they are merely offering a sticking plaster solution when what’s needed is major surgery.

Nice try. Good start. Now get on with it!

Bring back the death penalty says 30p Lee Anderson

Bring back the death penalty says 30p Lee Anderson

Feb 13, 2023 | Bylines, News

With our human rights already under threat, it’s difficult to trust a leader who believes Lee Anderson is the answer to any question, writes Bremain Chair Sue Wilson MBE for Yorkshire Bylines.

Newly elevated deputy chairman of the Conservative Party, Lee Anderson, is no stranger to controversy. Whether he’s picking a fight with Steve (Mr Stop Brexit) Bray, suggesting food bank users have a “budgeting problem”, or using a friend to pose as a swing-voter on camera, Anderson is a dab hand at stirring up trouble. And he seems to rather enjoy it.

Anderson was promoted in Rishi Sunak’s recent reshuffle, leaving many surprised, if not astounded, by the prime minister’s decision. With Sunak’s credibility already being questioned, Anderson’s advancement only raised more doubt about the prime minister’s judgement. Perhaps, considering Anderson’s latest comments regarding the death penalty, Sunak himself is now having second thoughts about the wisdom of his decision. If he isn’t, he certainly should be.

 

“100% success rate”

In an interview with The Spectator, Anderson expressed his support for the reintroduction of the death penalty by saying that “nobody has ever committed a crime after being executed”, describing it as a “100% success rate”. His comments forced the prime minister to note that neither he, nor the government, shared Anderson’s view and a return of the death penalty was not government policy.

Anderson went on to say that “certain groups” (presumably left-wing wokerati types) would complain that “you can never prove it”. He suggested that video evidence was strong enough proof to warrant an execution. It was an argument that fell apart on the appearance of a doctored video of Anderson himself confessing to a crime on social media, proving how easily video ‘evidence’ can be manipulated.

 

It’s the ‘will of the people’

Fellow Conservative MP and death penalty supporter, Scott Benton, was quick to defend Anderson’s stance, by suggesting that it was a policy “supported by a majority of the public”, as well as many of his Blackpool South constituents. Not only were the “liberal elites”, the media and Twitter “detached from the public” but any outcry was an example of the “usual leftie hysteria”.

 

Whilst I can’t speak for Benton’s constituents, it is certainly not true that the majority of the British public are in favour of the death penalty. In a recent YouGov poll, only 14% of Britons showed strong support for the death penalty, with a further 26% tending to support, making a total of 40%. Amongst Conservative voters, that total rose to 58% support in total. By comparison, amongst Labour voters, support fell to just 23%.

There was also a vast difference in levels of support dependent on age, with only 22% of 18–24-year-olds supporting capital punishment. For the over 65s age group, support rose to 54%. If Benton is to be believed, then presumably his constituents are elderly Tory voters yearning for an England that no longer exists, and that should be consigned to history. Along with his views on capital punishment.

 

No defence for the indefensible

Arguments commonly used in favour of the death penalty – usually in the case of murder – are that it serves as a deterrent, it provides closure for the families of victims and that it dispenses justice, of the biblical eye-for-an-eye variety. However, these arguments do not hold up.

According to Amnesty International (and others), there is no evidence to support the argument that the death penalty deters crime any more than long prison sentences. In addition, states that have a death penalty – often those with authoritarian regimes – do not have lower crime or murder rates than those that do not.

Even within the most vigorous of legal systems, miscarriages of justice do happen, and innocent people have, and still are being, executed. The other compelling argument against capital punishment is that it is simply morally wrong. Taking a human life is completely unethical and sets a bad example to society.

 

The global view

According to the Death Penalty Information Centre, 70% of nations have now abolished capital punishment. However, 60% of the world’s population live in countries where the death penalty is retained, including the highly populated China, India and the United States – the only G7 country to still have the death penalty. In 2021, 579 executions were recorded – a increase of 20% over the previous year. The highest numbers of executions took place in China, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Syria (in that order).

Our own Human Rights Act (HRA) came into force in October 2000, incorporating the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) into domestic British law. Article 2 of the HRA protects the right to life and states:

“Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law. No one shall be deprived of his life intentionally save in the execution of a sentence of a court following his conviction of a crime for which the penalty is provided by law.”

 

But the Human Rights Act, which protects many other basic human rights as well as the right to life, is currently under threat from justice minister and deputy PM Dominic Raab. His ‘bill of rights’ has been described by Liberty as a “wrecking ball” which would “smash your rights and freedoms”. Maybe Sunak should have a word, if he can work up the nerve.

We have come to expect a certain dangerous rhetoric from our government of late – in particular from the Home Office. So, it’s hardly a stretch to believe there might be more death penalty supporters lurking in government behind Anderson and Benton.

With a government that seems drawn to authoritarianism, and with many rights and legal protections under threat, we need to be vigilant.

Our right to life may not be under threat, but it’s increasingly difficult to trust a prime minister, or government, that believes Lee Anderson is the answer to any question.