The people need to get angry.

As with the USA government's shut down Brexit shows up the inadequacies of our own system of governance in that after two years 650 MPs have, as it currently stands, absolutely no idea how to satisfactorily resolve the situation and meet the wishes of the people in the 2016 referendum, which produced the biggest democratic mandate this country has ever known.

McKay Coppins of the monthly magazine The Atlantic wonders how the American government shutdown will end and records that congressional staffers, off the record, have said “ there may be no way out of this mess until something disastrous happens”. They raise various “macabre hypotheticals”, including a big food scare resulting from a lapse in inspections, or even a plane crash caused by a stressed-out air traffic  controller.  Coppins concludes that the current political dynamics won’t change until voters get a lot angrier.

The point about getting angrier is something I have repeatedly said is necessary here if things are ever going to change. The trouble is the people in this country are still too comfortable to even think about the need for political reform let alone getting off their backsides and doing something about it like lobby their MPs.  

Brexit exposes our politicians for the celebrity orientated inadequates they all are and have made themselves the easiest of targets if we can be bothered to lobby them. The trouble is that very few of us, as yet, have any idea of what it is we need to lobby them about so it is fortunate that THA’s six demands provides them with a readymade answer to that question. All the people have to do is wake up and find us and then demand the changes we believe in.

This is by no means a short term project and, before it starts, things are going to have to get much worse.  

Incidentally the USA’s shutdown, over the government’s budget, would be resolved if they had our fifth demand as part of their constitution because the approval of the governments annual budget, in this case including the controversial $5 billion for the ‘wall’, would be subject to a compulsory ‘People’s Referendum’ rather than left to the partisan House of Representatives to approve.