Early parliamentary elections in Great Britain or “A shot in the foot” of Theresa May
The unipolar world built by the West over the past 25 years, in the absence of global systemic competition, is degenerating into the stupidest postmodern tent and a mockery of common sense. There is a great deal of evidence of this, and the latest is the completed early parliamentary elections in the UK.
Why early? The next general parliamentary elections in the United Kingdom were supposed to take place in 2020, but plans were disrupted by Brexit and the associated resignation of Prime Minister David Cameron. Thus, by chance, Theresa May ended up in the chair of the highest representative of the UK executive branch. Madame May inherited a good dowry from Cameron: in the 2015 elections, the Tories, contrary to forecasts, won a landslide victory and gained absolute control over parliament - 330 seats out of 326 required for one-party rule.
The question is: if the situation has developed and is working in your favor, then why was it necessary to go to early parliamentary elections? On April 18, announcing the decision to hold them, May gave an explanation: they say, on the eve of important negotiations on the UK’s exit from the EU, the authorities need to make sure of the unity of the country. May’s desire to strengthen her own positions for more confident negotiations has not become some kind of terrible secret. Simply put, an additional motive was to rid the Prime Minister of his second-class complex.
For almost two months the political barometers showed clear weather for May and the Conservative Party. According to polls, 48% of voters are ready to vote for them, while the electoral resource of the opposition Labor members reached only 24%.
However, the election results are discouraging.
According to the preliminary results of the early parliamentary elections in the UK, the Conservative Party led by Prime Minister Theresa May has 307 seats, Labor - 257, Liberal Democrats - 12, Scottish Nationalists - 34, the rest of the parties are represented by 21 seats. Such figures mean that no party will receive 326 votes - half the votes plus one vote. In this case, a so-called “hung” parliament will be formed in the UK.
Truly, they do not seek good from good. Regarding personal achievements
Theresa May, then she can be congratulated on overcoming the “menshovarity” complex: Madam Prime Minister was re-elected to parliament in the Maidenhead constituency with a good result of more than 37 thousand votes - despite the fact that her rivals were such powerful political players as Buckethead, Elmo and the leader of the Possessed Monster Party.
No less disconcerting than the election results is the selection of sites as voting centers. Judging by the photo report of political scientist Vladimir Kornilov, these could be barns, trailers, garages, gyms, somewhere “in the hut,” laundries, sheds and utility rooms of local caretakers. Either the budget allocated for the elections was insufficient, or they decided “it will do.” On the other hand, given the farce into which elections have degenerated over the past 20 years, the British experience needs to be carefully summarized and studied.
Considering, however, that the politician and the prime minister are a team player, we can confidently conclude that the Conservative team, led by forward May, scored an own goal.
Something went wrong? How did this unfortunate “shot in the foot” happen?
What consequences could the situation with a “hung” parliament result in?
This is how State Duma Deputy Speaker Pyotr Tolstoy commented on the result of the parliamentary elections in Great Britain: “Brexit will be longer, Brexit will be longer, the tail will be cut off in parts.”
This means that the election results hit not only the Tories, but also the extreme Scottish and Irish nationalist parties, as well as the UKIP. If Scottish and Irish MPs “rocked the boat”, threatening to secede from the UK in the event of Brexit, then UKIP, the right-wing populist party, on the contrary, consisted of local Donald Trumps, who strove for a speedy break with the EU at any cost, “for good old Britain” and "special British spirit".
Thus, the forces capable of both accelerating Brexit and suspending the process of the UK’s exit from the EU have been removed from the UK Parliament. Those who remain will certainly begin to exercise caution, hesitate, bargain, weigh and outweigh. In a word, “cut off the dog’s tail in parts.”
Observers' opinion. The ruling “canned” party was let down by the idiotically organized election campaign and, especially, its manifesto, in which the party confirmed that it would follow the path of the so-called “hard Brexit” (exit not only from the EU, but also from the common economic space and customs union ), will continue to support NATO and the UN, will oppose a new Scottish independence referendum and seek a reduction in net increase in migration.
And then, breaking the “hard Brexit” formula, conservatives begin to mumble about Britain’s participation in some European programs and willingness to pay for them even after leaving the EU.
But all this is trifle compared to what a pig the Tories are planning to put on their ordinary voters immediately after the parliamentary elections. Not surprisingly, the trump cards against migration and “Brexit is Brexit” did not work, and voters were no longer as willing to vote for “canned goods” as they were two years ago.
The case primarily concerns an attempt to revise the rules for receiving social assistance (free nursing services, etc.). If previously the right to it was granted to everyone whose wealth (savings plus sources of income) did not exceed 23 thousand 250 pounds sterling, now the limit will be increased to 100 thousand pounds, but it will include the value of real estate. The catch is that social care payments, under the Conservative plans, could be deferred until a person dies. But, according to the new rules, real estate is excluded from the “fireproof” assets that can be sold to pay off these debts.
In addition, the Tories have encroached on free hot lunches (of three full courses, by the way) for primary schoolchildren, proposing to replace them with light breakfasts for all primary school students. This idea also did not cause a storm of enthusiasm: most children come to school already full at the start of classes, and it is also obvious that breakfasts will be cheaper and less nutritious than the current hot lunches. Labor, in turn, announced that it would provide free hot lunches to all primary school pupils. In addition, Labor leader Jeremy Corbyn accused the Conservatives of being ruthless towards the elderly and called their idea of removing property from non-burnable assets a “dementia tax”.
Also, although Labor (a pro-European party) promises to increase income tax, they have simultaneously developed a plan for investment in the social, educational, scientific sphere, communication and infrastructure projects. Their list also includes ending the confrontation with Russia.
Total. The greedy and self-confident Tories were ruined by a disastrous and ill-conceived election campaign. With a relative majority in parliament, they will be forced to either form a minority government or join a coalition. The most “inexpensive” option for a coalition seems to observers to be a Tory team-up with the Northern Irish Democratic Unionist Party, which has the missing 10 parliamentary seats.
The “canned goods” can count as their assets the defeat of the nationalists – separatists and the UKIP, which until recently had representation in parliament and occupied second place in more than a hundred constituencies. Now adherents of “good old Britain” are left without polymers from the word “completely”. 5 ministers were expelled from parliament, former leader of the Liberal Democrats Nick Clegg, former leader of the Scottish nationalists Alex Salmond, deputy leader of the Scottish National Party Angus Robertson. They write that perhaps the main joke is the epic flight of the minister who wrote a book about how not to lose in elections.
Labour, despite internal squabbles and external attacks, showed the best result since Tony Blair.
All together, this may mean that Great Britain is immersed in solving complex internal problems and the country’s less involvement in the Syrian conflict, a decrease in the degree of confrontation with Russia and the relegation of assistance to the Poroshenko regime to the “someday later” list.
“Hard years are passing, even harder ones are coming.” There’s nothing you can do about it: every Evil Pinocchio is the architect of his own hemorrhoids. Having a crane in your hands, chase an additional tit and now it’s pointless to turn it this way and that, watching how what your hands were just holding flies away. You need to be able to do this!
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.