Portugal sees rise in Green vote

Two-party European rule ends

Portugal sees rise in Green vote 1The BBC reports this morning on a surge in Liberal and Green vote across Europe, with the two party domination broken for the first time. The centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) and centre-left Socialists and Democrats (S&D) have long held more than half of the 751 seats in Parliament between them, but have ceded ground to the Liberal and Green parties. They have also lost out to nationalist right wing parties, but only in certain counties, notably France and Italy. Turnouts have been high across Europe.
With the results not yet finalised in Portugal, the green PAN party (People-Animals-Nature) is on course to win its first ever seat in the European Parliament, possibly even two. Nationwide the PS socialist party looks to get around a third of the vote, and the PSD social democrats around a fifth. Portugal contributes 21 MEPs to the European Parliament.

UK totally divided

In the UK the situation has become even more polarised after the election results. According to the BBC if you add up the parties that officially want a second referendum, they come to 40.4% of the vote, with the “Brexiteers” closely behind. If you take into account that some of the Nationalist parties actually support a second referendum, but also have “leave” supporters, it looks like the original 52/48 hasn’t shifted at all. Impossible to see a solution to a totally divided country.

8 thoughts on “Portugal sees rise in Green vote”

  1. One thing the UK results tell us very clearly is that 50% of those who voted want a hard or no deal brexit. Unfortunately, the fact that the Tories lost votes to the BP, will likely send the Tory MPs flocking to the arms of a hard/no deal brexiteer, so we will end up with a Prime Minister of a minority Government pushing for something that fewer than half the electorate voted for!

  2. Election and referendum results depend on the losing sides acceptance of the outcome of the vote.
    This is democracy at work.
    It seems the minorities in the Metropolitan areas won’t accept this.
    So a stalemate emerges to the detriment of the country.

  3. I can see the next main election be the future of the NHS. They already been hint of pushing it to PVT by a leader. People be reading the media closely

  4. First, apologies, the figure in my lost should have been only 40%. In fact fewer people voted for the BP, than signed the revoke Article 50 petition!

    Martin, First, the referendum was not democratic as it contained illegalities in the Leave campaigns, with criminal investigations ongoing. This would have made any binding referendum invalid. Quite how something based in illegal activity can be deemed to be democratic, no-one has yet explained!

    Secondly, the U.K. is a Parliamentary democracy. Theresa May went to the voters to get a mandate for her version of brexit. The voters showed clearly they did not want her version of brexit. Unfortunately the ERG, who are in a minority in a minority party, refuse to accept that.

    As for a stalemate, The Brexit Party has basically taken over where UKIP left off, plus it hoovered up Tory hard right voters. It got about 34% of a 30% turnout, which equates to about 1 in 10 voters! The big risers are the strong remain parties. That is the way things are moving.

    Third, the voters in the metropolitan areas are voting for the party which they believe will best service their views and interests. They have every right to do so. In addition, everyone has the right to change their mind, if they didn’t there would be no point in having general, local or other elections regularly! Indeed, it was David Davis who, in 2012 said: “If democracy cannot change it’s mind, it ceases to be a democracy.”.

  5. I really do know why people are saying a “hard-Brexit” would be a bad thing. We would be free to trade with the whole world without eu intervention. We could also then negotiate trade deals with eu. The UK economy is doing ok and the Pound would rise in value. Brits would still be free to holiday in the eu. Brits would be able to work in the eu, they’d just need work permits. There were no problems before we joined the eec.

    There are serious problems within the eu. Corruption is rife, it is un-democratic and has never returned a set of accounts. About the only good thing it can claim is that there hasn’t been a war in 70 years.

  6. Well, it is news to me and most of my friends that there were illegalities in the Referendum, either to stay or leave the EU, and that criminal investigations proceed.

    However, Britain is leaving the EU as agreed in Parliament but now delayed until October.
    We need not to agree the deal PM Teresa May “negotiated”.
    This appears to have been simply a “Take it or Leave it” from the EU who would do anything to scupper Britain leaving its undemocratic club.
    As it has been explained to me the ‘deal’ leaves Britain in a perilous state.
    Much better to have a No Deal Brexit to save huge payments forward.
    Don’t forget Britain has a huge trading deficit with the EU being such a valuable market for their manufacturers.
    It will take microseconds for EU to become friendly and cooperative post No Deal Brexit in order to secure this market.
    Having been to the various meetings sponsored by the British Embassy for the benefit of expatriates, it seems civil services in both Britain and Portugal and indeed all other EU countries, are well prepared for a No Deal Brexit as they all realise the terms offered us are ridiculous.

  7. Mauriceered – A hard brexit would be a bad thing because, not only would the economy suffer, we would lose involvement in a vast number of EU agencies organisations in which we have had a major influence and which have benefitted the citizens of the U.K. for many years. Things like Eurasmus, Euratom, security and defence, etc. We would also lose influence both in Europe and on the global stage, as being in Europe has given us a voice and strength throughout the world.

    As for negotiating Trade Deals, well first we have to negotiated the schedules we want with the WTO. The U.K. wants to merely carry over the schedule we have with the EU. Other countries, such as Russia (surprise, surprise) and even friendly countries like New Zealand have objected to these, so we need to negotiate a schedule to which they will agree. Not an easy task. Meanwhile other countries will impose tariffs on goods they buy from the U.K., which they have to do under WTO terms and which will make us uncompetitive.

    There is talk of the U.K. unilaterally lowering or even abolishing tariffs on some goods, but if they do this, they would have to do this for all countries, not just the EU. This would not only mean the U.K. could be flooded with cheap goods, undermining U.K. manufacturing and other industries/companies and rendering them unable to compete, but it would remove any incentive for other countries to enter into a free trade deal with us, as they already get free or cheap access to our markets!!!

    I agree there is a lot wrong with the EU, but then there is an awful lot wrong with the UK’s political systems, too. Remember the expenses claims scandals? We must be careful we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater!

  8. Martin – In February Leave.EU (headed by Farage) was fined £15,000 for illegally using contact details of Arron Banks’ Insurance company’s customers to send almost 300,000 political marketing messages and a further £45,000 for sending a marketing campaign for his company to political subscribers. His company was fined a further £60,000 for this latter violation. The ICO conducted a full Audit of Leave.EU and Bank’s company.

    Leave.EU is also being investigated by the National Crime Agency over a multimillion-pound donation the Electoral Commission believes came from another one of Banks’s companies that is based in the Isle of Man, and thus not legally allowed to participate in UK elections, as donations must come from sources within the EU.

    Vote Leave (headed by Boris and Gove) was fined £61,000 for breaking spending limits. They donated hundreds of thousands of pounds to a pro-brexit youth group days before the referendum, money which was used to pay the firm Aggregate IQ, which collects and analyses the data of users of e.g. facebook to send them targeted political information. It was during these last few days that the polls showed a shift towards leaving, so clearly this played a significant part in the final decision. It cannot, therefore be said that the referendum result should be respected as democratic.

    On the other hand, a “club” in which citizens of member countries can elect members of its parliament can rightly be said to be democratic! Only this morning one brexit MEP made the point that he would engage with his fellow MEP across the parliament, both in the full Parliament and in committees to determine and influence EU decisions!

    As for your comments about a trade deal, you really should not believe Leave proponents, rhetoric. Yes, no deal will harm the EU, too, but one thing they will not contemplate is damaging the integrity of the EU and it’s principals and four freedoms. They also stand to benefit by the relocation of, for example, the EU medicines agency and the EU banking authority, from London to Amsterdam and Paris respectively (resulting in a loss of over1,000 jobs and related income to the exchequer) and other companies and organisations who need either headquarters or an office in the EU if the U.K. leaves.

    See also my response to Martin.


Leave a comment

Translate »