A toolkit to remedy the disconnect between UK voters & European Parliament
updated 14 April 2019

The need

Westminister Parliament has been such a mess, and people will be slow to realise that UK registered voters will be given the opportunity to vote in May for UK Members of the European Parliament.

Low turnout will be used as a weapon; driving a further wedge between Brexit-weary people and a political system unfit for the 21st century.

Key dates:

24 April 2019 Candidate Forms due to Electoral Commission
7 May 2019 Voter Registration closes.
23 May 2019 Polling Day in England, Northern Ireland, Scotland & Wales

The opportunity

It is easy to vote in the UK. Ensuring you and your circle are ready to vote is critical. Dark money and overseas influences may be able to buy advertising but they cannot do what you can: put your ballot in the box on the day.

A sample action that’s free and easy to take now

I saw this tweet. So I wrote an SMS message, and sent it to every UK-based person in my SMS inbox. 47 texts took me less than 30 minutes.

Here’s what I said:

I’m just touching base with friends to see that they are registered to vote in the upcoming European Parliament elections. Postal voting is available if you’ll be out of town.

Registration closes on 7 May, and EU27 citizens voting for MEPs here need to opt-in. Let me know what links you need to help everyone get registered in time.

And enjoy your Sunday!

xx Kate

Ps copy-and-paste to send to your friends.

So far, one EU27 business owner has asked for the EU27 voting links by email; and a handfull of friends have confirmed they’re registered and/or they will share the message with their friends.

One person asked:

“Is the thinking that if people are active in voting in these it gives a good gauge for another ref?”

To which I replied: Yes, absolutely from a domestic perspective, the big parties need to see voters using their EP vote constructively.

But also, the EU27 will meet with Mrs May in June. If UK turnout has been low AND destructive jokers have been elected by voters for UKIP and Farage’s new party, then the UK is sending a message that it STILL doesn’t care about the work the EU does. If we lose EU27 cooperation whilst we’re still in limbo, then we risk a lot. Please help people realise that a constructive vote for a serious parliamentarian not a joker or saboteur means a lot for all our futures.

Another sample action that’s free and easy to take now

Here’s the email I sent my mother-in-law, who is an introvert.

Thank you so much for marching alongside us on March 23. It meant the world to me that we were all together, and I’m glad that it was me you chose to accompany you on your first-ever march.

Today, I’m writing to ask you please to do something I know you’ll hate but which I think you’ll agree is good for democracy. Fortunately, it can be done at home, rain or shine.

It’s about the European Parliament Elections being held across 28 countries in May. Here in the UK, the date is 23 May 2019.

Millions are being spent on advertising promoting NoDeal even though it will be a calamity. Now a new party promoting Brexit has been formed. In both cases, the source of funding is not known. Face to face conversations are the best buttress against ignorance winning.

Before the Voter Registration deadline 7 May 2019, please can you have conversations with:

• Person 1
• Person 2
• Person 3

The conversation is two-fold. Please can each check they appear on the Electoral Register. If they do not, it’s easy to sign up online but without delay. Here is the link.

https://www.gov.uk/electoral-register
(If the person doesn’t have their National Insurance Number to hand, the NI Number can be retrieved or requested here on https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/hm-revenue-customs/contact/national-insurance-numbers)

Second, it’s hard to know what candidates will stand, given the short notice. But for now, voters in your area can look here to see who has stood and been elected in the past.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yorkshire_and_the_Humber_(European_Parliament_constituency)

• The two national parties who have been strong pro-European advocates are Liberal Democrat and Greens; and Greens are international. Also the Yorkshire Party is allied with SNP and Plaid Cymru so safely pro-European.
• The Labour MEP Richard Corbett I can personally recommend because he has led well. https://www.richardcorbett.org.uk
• The parties standing in 2014 that wish to reduce rights and break up the EU include: UKIP, Conservative, An Independence from Europe, BNP, English Democrat, No2EU. Also Farage may have a Brexit Party candidate.

If I didn’t think this would directly affect [your son’s] and my work prospects and our daughter’s future, I wouldn’t ask something so awkward. I truly do feel it is that important.

I’ll give you a call at the weekend, to check in and see how it’s going.

Love, Kate

You can copy and paste my note, change it any way you want, and send it on to your mother, your daughter or son, your bingo or salsa partner.

You can use Wikipedia to find your recipient’s constituency. The anti-EU candidate parties may differ in each.

Voting for Europe (as of 14 April 2019)

1. Voters are hungry for recommendations. For non-partisan recommendations, a newspaper (like the Guardian did in 1992, 2009) or an NGO (like European Movement? Compass?) needs to step up.
2. Here are two sources based on preliminary information: from @PascalLTH and @Metatone
3. People need to decide if they priortise beating Farage/Hannan or electing the best public servants. A tool to assess MEP participation for all member states is here.
4. Labour MEPs have signed a Pro-Europe manifesto (so far, only found on Huffington Post)
5. Pro-Eu lists formed top-down may not be possible under Electoral Commission rules. Indivdual voters on a region-by-region basis need to prepare that anything permissible must be driven from the ground up.

EU27 Citizens Can Vote in British European Parliamentary Elections

EU27 citizens need to opt-in, not simply be on the UK Electoral Roll.

The UK Electoral Commission created this website: https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/

The EU27 citizen opt-in form is:
https://www.yourvotematters.co.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0011/255197/EU-citizen-European-Parliament-voter-registration-form-English.pdf

Advice from the3Million campaign group about Euro Parliamentary Elections 2019 is here: https://www.the3million.org.uk/how-to-register-to-vote

Digital tools to help

Last year, the European Commission used the Nationbuilder tool to make websites for each of the 28 member states. Ours is shared with Ireland.

The remarkable overhaul of the UK’s government’s own digital communications and its universal reach puts voter registration and voting information in easy reach.

Wikipedia provides a wonderful service accessible to all. Pages for each European Parliamentary Constituency are maintained, and all voters can see the boundaries, the list of current MEPs by sub-region and party; and who stood in 2014 ranked by % of turnout.

In 2019, the UK Electoral Commission launched a new site, Your Vote Matters, I find attractive and easy to use. The tagline is especially poignant.

Key links

BBC explainer on how voting works
European Parliament explainer on how voting in UK works
EU voter activation downloadable posters, templates, etc
Useful links from This Time I’m Voting (EU voter activation project)

MyEU.uk Visual interactive map of how EU funds have enriched life in the UK, made with love by Tech For UK.

More tools to come

Thanks to technology journalist Mike Butcher, an extraordinary network of technology teams have contributed, often at lightening speed, to the toolkit anti-Brexit and pro-European grassroots groups can use.

As the reality of the upcoming British elections of Members of European Parliament becomes ever more obvious, I imagine more tools being devised to make it easier to enrol new voters, get friends to check their electoral roll status, and arrange ride shares on polling day.

The network is called @TechForUK.

Much of the data is open-source. The ingenuity Tech For UK teams bring is making the apps fun and easy to use.

My role

I am not a member of any group, party, tribe. I’m here on Medium, Twitter and in real life to help people do hard things. That includes summoning the social courage to vault over awkwardness because something matters and the clock is ticking.

A bit more about me here.

I help people hear the signal through the noise; see to the farthest horizon of possibility and ready themselves to navigate towards it.

And I will speak truth to power.

Getting friends to vote in May EP elections was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

The past two years and a half since the UK referendum in June 2016 have been a never-ending source of “triggering” events. More precisely, I refer to how the UK government’s actions and their relentless drive to concentrate all the power in their hands took me back again and again to the (post-)communist Romania. That’s harsh you would say. UK cannot be more different. It is true, however the methods of the current government are eerily similar. It feels like they are executing from the same book. Even scarier, I see how the same methods lead to the same reaction in people.

After writing about these parallels here and here and here, I promised myself to stop writing. Two events of the past weeks made me change my mind and I decided to write again on a “translation” in authoritarian terms of what I see now in UK.

First, one of my responses to a tweet went madly viral. Like 300k views viral.

Andra Sonea on Twitter

@maxwellmuseums @HighgateCemeter I surely don't agree with vandalising any monument. However, I do understand where this comes from. Marx name has been used by communist regimes to murder millions and the crimes have not been acknowledged. For those affected by these crimes, it is hard to bear.

The second, is Theresa May explaining us how she would push aside the mould in order to eat the jam underneath, as a suggestion probably that she “does austerity” too.

I decided after this to write something about how food shortages work. Why?

First, the reactions to my tweet about the vandalism of Marx grave in Hampstead cemetery were split in broadly two categories. There were broadly two camps: one situated more of the extreme right who “liked” and re-tweeted my response and one situated very much to the left who were disagreeing with it. I profoundly dislike both camps. Extreme-right confiscates our lived experience under communism to justify their radical ideological positioning while many who declare themselves nowadays communists or socialists have no knowledge or curiosity about how fifty years of socialism played out. The death of millions is typically dismissed as a footnote by some and assumed and misused by others to advocate just another extremist ideology.

My experience living in communism did not make me support extreme right views. My living in communism made me however be very aware of extremes of all flavours and also of the fact that their mechanisms and ideologies are more similar than different. Intolerance, “othering”, cliques, asset stripping, political and economic control in the same hands, corruption.

Therefore, here I stand to tell you from my lived experience, how shortages of food in countries which should not have such problems, are engineered on purpose, for mass control.

Secondly, May reaction showed me if anything that she does not know what food shortage is. It is not that among lots of other food at home you also forgot that you have a jar of jam which in the meantime developed mould. It rather means that you know precisely all what you have at home and you are rigorously planning how to somehow produce breakfast, lunch and dinner out of nothing. It means that if you open a jar of jam, it will be consumed a bit every day and the mould thing does not even happen.

So, after this rather long introduction, here are a few points I would like you to know:

1. Food shortages will consume your ‘free” time.

A typical one-hour weekly trip to the local supermarket may transform in more trips or more time spent there. In the eighties in Romania, you could easily spend 5h Saturday morning in a queue for 1l of milk. UK will not get there. However, sourcing the food you need when it is not available as you expect, will take time.

2. Food shortages will not lead to you losing weight.

One of the most common reactions I’ve heard in UK following the announcement of food shortages after 29th of March is “that’s good, I will lose weight.” I have to disappoint you, but this is not how it works. There will be food but random. Not necessarily what you wish when you want to lose weight. The unreliability of food supply leads to disorderly eating and often people are fatter than they otherwise would be.

3. Food shortages will lead to you forgetting how to do your favourite recipes.

When I was 14, I wanted to join my brother and a group friends on a hiking trip. My mum told me that as I cannot take care of myself or others yet, I cannot go. However, if I cook every day that summer, I can go next year. Such was my will to go that I accepted the challenge.

To my huge surprise I have discovered that cooking by the old books was impossible. There was no chance to have all the ingredients you were meant to have for a dish. Everything was an approximation of the highest order. I invented many recipes, at times making my family ill in the process. A pizza on which I could put only onions out of all the listed ingredients, is a memorable joke in the family.

4. Food shortages will reveal some ugly human behaviours.

As an adult, I met at times in the working environment all over Europe, people who made me tell myself: “I am glad I did not meet this person in the communist Romania”. What this means? What did I fear? There are people out there, and I am sure everybody has met some, which have an unstoppable desire to control people and situations. When you meet them in organisations, they can create a toxic environment and they can quite often raise to the top. However, you are essentially free to move, and their influence is anyway somehow contained by organisational rules.

When such people find themselves in situations where their power over others is bigger and the control is closer to the bone by affecting the basic human needs of others (food, shelter, etc.) these people can be real monsters. In my view, such people and the potential for harm exists in very culture and we should be wary of it.

5. Food shortages will happen gradually.

As a child I asked grandma many times to tell me how things were before, trying to piece together a “normal” country out of her words. In the seventies, she said, I noticed first that olives were hard to find. Then “rocky sugar”. I was puzzled. I could probably see these items once every few years. Do you mean, before they were in the shop every day? Unconceivable to my child mind. This is how it starts. Not with everyday items.

6. Food shortages are humiliating.

I remember clearly the feeling of going out of the shop after hour of queuing. My long braids undone in the physical hustle that these queues developed into. If it was milk, oranges, meat or bread, I felt angry and humiliated and I wanted to throw away the bag with whatever I bought. You don’t have to go through such experiences and hopefully your kids should not either. I can guarantee you that even staying in an orderly queue for food is humiliating.

7. Food shortages are not an equalizer.

You would think that everybody would have the same memory of long periods of food shortage. This cannot be further from the truth. Black markets of various sorts develop as well as networks of people who would have privileged access to things. If you are not part of those networks, you are fully exposed.

My memory of empty shelves in the shops is not shared by many because their fridges were full of food which was procured through alternative networks, we were not part of. My parents were engineers, relocated for work in a part of the country we had not family in and they were not part of the communist structures either. We were literally outside the black market for food.

8. Food shortages are engineered.

I now know that Romania should have never had food shortages given its land and the climate. My dad can now have, from two pots on the balcony, tomatoes for the whole summer while in my garden in London I can barely have three tomatoes in September. The control of food was intentional as one of many means of control of the population and a very effective one. The shortages started slowly and in time they became more varied and ridiculous. In the late eighties, it was common to cut electricity every day for a few hours in in the winter. Then there was no petrol. The list was endless.

What this has to do with what are we about to experience if no 29th of March we fall out of the cliff? You will see queues, you’ll waste your time on things you didn’t before, you’ll see ugly behaviours where you least expect and essentially, you’ll have less time to keep the politicians in check. Many will say that all is the fault of EU and or the immigrants and the othering will continue for a while. It will be one of the means of control , to keep people busy while massive asset striping will happen in the legal vacuum created intentionally through the “No Deal”.

Andra spoke at #NoDust at Conway Hall on 5 Sep 2016, and at #NoDust2 at Roehampton University on 27 Jan 2017.

Readers of this piece are encouraged to explore other #NoDust posts, including those by Ferdinand, Nyla Nox, and others.

On Shortages. 8 Lessons from Another Life. was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Guillaume Chaslot worked on a YouTube algorithm that used the time a user spent watching a particular video to make recommendations to that user which increased the time spent watching videos, and therefore maximised YouTube’s advertising revenues. Guillaume tweeted:

Guillaume Chaslot on Twitter

The YouTube algorithm I worked on heavily promoted Brexit, because divisiveness is efficient for watch time, and watch time leads to ads. Brits deserve deserve to know what @YouTube's AI promoted by the millions during the referendum. Without transparency there is no democracy https://t.co/UPclipTfZX

This algorithm drives a positive feedback loop and unfortunately mere transparency does not help much. If you like puppies and kittens then YouTube will show you more adorable pets. However, if you are a closet extremist then YouTube will show you videos that support and amplify your extremism, normalizing this behaviour, and the more extreme the videos you watch the more you will be shown even more extreme content.

Feedback is everywhere in our lives. It controls our bodies, our utilities, our money supply, our weather, our governments, our behaviours through social interactions. Its impact is also poorly understood. Feedback plays a big part in economics and leads to booms and crashes, but is barely studied.

There are two types of feedback loop. Negative feedback ‘feeds back’ a portion of the output signal to the input, acting in the opposite direction to the input signal. Negative feedback is responsible for stability and control. It’s what keeps our body temperature stable, our speed constant when driving and our money stable relative to the goods and services we buy. Here’s a simple negative feedback loop for driving a car at constant speed.

Positive feedback amplifies small input signals. It’s what is responsible for tornadoes and hurricanes (“the butterfly effect”), mechanical devices shaking themselves to bits, as well as the spread of panic responsible for stampedes in cattle and runs on banks like Northern Rock. Positive feedback is useful, being responsible for contractions in childbirth, the exponential growth of companies and the oscillators that drive our electronics, but can be extremely destructive. Positive feedback tends to drive things to extremes.

In many areas negative and positive feedback loops interact, leading to extremely complex behaviours. Here’s a good example of the self-reinforcing interacting feedback loops that led to the exponential growth of Apple’s smartphone.

Feedback is used to groom extremists. Take someone’s natural indignation when shown an injustice, then deliver more and more information that feeds that anger and blocks rational thought. It creates believers that will not easily accept counter arguments based on logic and evidence — particularly when told that those with other views are trying to hurt you in some way.

The same mechanism drives Brexit. How many of those who still think leaving the EU is the right thing to do use the words ‘I believe’ when talking about their views? All of them. They can’t support their case with evidence, nor give real benefits of leaving, but they don’t believe any expert’s evidence either. Their minds can’t be changed. It’s a form of extremism.

As this diagram shows, in which every feedback loop is positive, it is in YouTube’s (and every other free social media’s) interest to maximise the divisive content it hosts, because that drives additional content and income from advertising. There are few controls on what social media can host, because of laws on freedom of speech. The only control on the content we absorb is our own moral character.

What YouTube is doing is amplifying social division and, almost certainly, contributing to the rise in mental illness and violence. We need to break this positive reinforcement loop. Like pollution, social networks impose a high cost on society while the network operator benefits. This is a type of market failure called a negative externality. Just as we use regulation to ensure that the polluter cleans up their own mess, we need regulation of social media to eliminate this externality.

As a society we already control content of a sexual nature on social media platforms because people find it offensive. There’s no reason why we shouldn’t similarly control violent, extremist or racist content. However, we don’t have to ban it. We can use nudge theory to reduce positive feedback.

YouTube and Facebook should put contributors of extremist materials into ‘Pay to view’ categories. Users would have to register with the site using their personal details to view this content. Payment by anonymous means, such as Bitcoin, would be banned. This would help keep youngsters from radicalisation and would deter users from viewing the more extreme content, knowing that their viewing was no longer anonymous. It would also let content providers know that their content was too extreme — to increase their income it would benefit them to keep it out of the “pay per view” area.

However, in the same way, social media COULD be used in a positive way, to improve society’s general mental health. By detecting people with potentially harmful thoughts and promoting content to them that widens their viewpoint — negative, not positive feedback — we could have a much safer, more tolerant and happier society. This is a positive side to social media that could, with the right regulatory environment, be of great benefit.

The Need For Social Media Regulation was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Each individual’s identity is personal to them. Is it inherited or is it defined by the choices we make? What does your identity really mean to you?

I can say this is a philosophical question I hadn’t given much thought to. At its core my identity is first and foremost Irish. It is not something I chose or considered, simply put, it is who I am. But would you consider me Irish if I told you I was born in Northern Ireland?

The dictionary defines that term but it doesn’t mention the unique affinity that identity has in the North of Ireland. For us it is often synonymous with religion and I am no exception to that. The political landscape and divides have changed massively since I was a child but when growing up I understood that I was born and live on the island of Ireland. I knew there were safe places and not safe places and that was often determined by your religious upbringing. Strangers presumed my identity before I’d been given the opportunity to form one for myself.

I was 11 when the Good Friday Agreement came into place. It’s an agreement between both the British and Irish governments that cements and protects the rights and status of all citizens in the North and one that I’d find myself looking towards. The peace process afforded us the great privilege to choose our nationality and put us in a unique position within the United Kingdom. I didn’t quite understand the intricacies or complexities around this right until beginning the process of stabilising my husband’s status within the UK.

It would seem that right to self identification is not so easily recognised by the UK home office

We married in Belfast July 2015

Our application for a residence card was refused on the grounds that I am "Automatically a British Citizen” as I was "clearly born in the United Kingdom"

They referred to the British Nationality Act 1981, an act of parliament. A big, intimidating, powerful law and left us with one option. I looked to my solicitor and found myself reading through a form to renounce a citizenship I never accepted or laid claim to. It starts with a declaration I am a British citizen Something didn’t feel right. I had 14 days to try to understand the BNA and GFA and how they operate alongside each other. 14 days to consider how important my Irish identity really was and I couldn’t help but feel it was being under valued. Like it was only a partial identity or a lesser one. I had the complete support of my husband who was raised in a liberal free thinking west coast of America family, who believes wholly in citizens rights and was prepared for whatever my decision would be. I focused on the Good Friday Agreement which states:

"the two governments recognise the birthright of all the people of Northern Ireland to identify themselves and be accepted as Irish or British or both, as they may so chose"

And furthermore that there was

"A general obligation on government and public bodies fully to respect, on the basis of equality of treatment, the identity and ethos of both communities in Northern Ireland and a clear formulation of the rights not to be discriminated against"

We had to appeal.

By the time our hearing at the first tier tribunal came around we’d been in the process for almost two years. During this time we discovered many other couples had been through the same or similar and began to realise that what could have been a clerical error or a misunderstanding of the GFA was something more. Something institutionalised within the Home Office itself where that right to determine your identity is irrelevant should you require to utilise immigration law. They continued to hold Jake’s passport during this time, even after we found that in cases where an appeal is in progress the Home Office should only continue doing so in “exceptional cases where there are serious concerns that the applicant may abscond if the passport is returned." The unnecessary retention of passports is something I became greatly interested in and personally think a judicial review is desperately needed.

Preparing for the appeal hearing was surreal. I found myself searching through my entire life and hoping there was enough “proof” to defend who I was in my statement. We had the powerhouse for citizens rights that is Niall O’Donnghaile of Sinn Fein along with the SDLPs Claire Hanna and Alliances Paula Bradshaw all give letters of support. We waited 5 hours for a 20 minute hearing that would massively impact our lives and waited another 3 months for a decision.

Judge S Gillespie allowed our appeal under the immigration (European economic area) regulations 2006. He stated that:

"under the terms of the Good Friday agreement people of Northern Ireland are in a unique position within the United Kingdom. The British and Irish governments recognised the birthright of all the people in Northern Ireland to identify themselves as Irish or British or both, as they may so chose."

"The constitutional changes effected by the Good Friday Agreement with its annexed British-Irish Agreement, the latter amounting to an international treaty between sovereign governments supersede the British Nationality Act 1981 in so far as the people of Northern Ireland are concerned. He or she is permitted to chose their nationality as a birthright. Nationality cannot therefore be imposed on them at birth."

We were speechless. Liberated, completely overjoyed. We found the judge’s decision to be clear, concise and powerful. One line in particular resonated with me “I find the appellants wife is an Irish citizen and has only ever been such." We had won at the first hurdle and two weeks later the Home Office lodged an application to appeal to the upper tribunal which we fully expected. It was however denied on the grounds that there was “no arguable error in law" A second judge agreed that it is possible to be Irish only and be born in Northern Ireland and although we are not finished yet, they can still attempt one more appeal, we feel empowered and vindicated and optimistic that others won’t have to endure the same struggle. That there will be recognition of the right to self identify in the North, a right that with Brexit looming needs to be protected more than ever.

*update*

Permission to appeal was granted to the Home Office, we returned to court November 26th. The Home Office asked for an adjournment which means we’ll be returning to court again - within the next 6 months.

The UK Home Office argue that the provisions of the British Nationality Act 1981 and the Immigration (European Economic Area) regulations 2016 are compatible with the UKs international obligations under the British-Irish Agreement. This is incorrect.

The Secretary of state argues:

“A treaty HMG is a party of does not alter the laws of the United Kingdom”

That the courts do not have the power to enforce treaty obligations.

The Home Office routinely chooses to ignore the Good Friday Agreement leading many to believe there could be a further departure from the treaty post Brexit.

If choosing our nationality is our birthright then nationality cannot be imposed at birth.

Identity in Northern Ireland - The British Nationality Act & The Good Friday Agreement was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Rt Hon Dominic Grieve QC
House of Commons
London SW1A 0AA

Dear Mr Grieve

You asked people to signal clearly that they do not wish Britain to leave its membership of the European Union. My MP is a government minister who says he cannot oppose the government. My voice is, as a consequence, not being heard.

Please can you represent those people in constituencies where Conservative MPs do not countenance any disagreement with Her Majesty’s Government’s direction of travel? They too lack a voice.

I look forward to a Meaningful Vote reflecting what Parliament has learned about the terms of the withdrawal deal. I hope that the eventual vote based on evidence and fact is one that keeps Britain within the world’s largest single trading bloc and the continent’s most successful peace project ever.

Yours sincerely,

Dr Katherine C Hammer FRSA

Encl. Your recent interview in The Independent

Want more independent thinking?

Visit #NoDust on Medium for more articles and videos by thoughtful people talking openly about the issues and themes opened up by the divisive EU Referendum and its aftermath.

Write now to Dominic Grieve QC was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Dear ____________________________

The total absence of impact assessments — a practice the UK Civil Service brought to EU Affairs — is not a surprise but its confirmation is shocking. The HMG strategy of asking the voting public to give it the benefit of the doubt in these negotiations has well and truly expired.

Meanwhile, Lady Borwick’s son Thomas (formerly CTO of Cambridge Analytica whose work is now scrutinised by the US Congress & Federal law enforcement and implicated in the potential treason of the 45th President) has rolled back the most menacing Facebook advertisements, but continues to use targeted Facebook advertising to promote an extreme Brexit.

Here is an advert that was served to a Facebook user who lives in Oliver Heald’s constituency. It promotes the Labour MP serving in the adjacent constituency. (Facebook targeting by postcode is not fully precise.) Perhaps you’ll see this (as I do) as clear evidence that loyalty to Brexit trumps party loyalty.

The advert appeared yesterday, in parallel with the DUP debacle and murmurs of a 2018 General Election. In my experience of Facebook advertising, such an advert can be created and placed in a matter of hours.

Call to action

Please can you share the photo and explanation with the Chief Whip and with Damian Collins so that they are aware that expressly political adverts are being purchased, and by whom.

Forgive advice from an amateur but it seems to me: The most honourable thing those Conservatives who wish to distance themselves from the European Research Group and the advice of the Legatum Institute can do is (a) talk with donors and (b) publicly break from ERG/Brexit Ultras.

The strategy David Cameron and you used during coalition (supporting the 2013 Private Members Bill, agreeing to the Referendum) gave the movement oxygen it is now using to kill the Conservative Party.

I will do what I can to build support for any elected Member who acts to halt Article 50 in light of what #WeNowKnow.

Yours kindly,

Dr Kate Hammer

Helpful resources

Best for Britain, Represent Us and European Movement are all campaigning for a Meaningful Vote on the final deal: Amendment 7 to Clause 9 (Dominic Grieve, QC — CON) and New Clause 4 (Chris Leslie — LAB). The debate on these amendments are currently scheduled for December 13. Please act now.

Journalists writing on data driven campaigning and dark money include Carole Cadwalladr (Observer), George Monbiot (Guardian), James Patrick (Byline), Adam Ramsay and Peter Geoghegan (Open Democracy), Tim Fenton (Zelo Street). See also Open Democracy’s DUP Dark Money series.

Concerned about Vote Leave funding? Follow Jo Maugham QC and Good Law Project as they pursue a judicial review.

Concerned we’re boxed in?
Article 50 revocability was not the issue in the Gina Miller case, nor were the Courts of England and Wales asked to determine revocability. Politically EU 27 member state leaders have said repeatedly: Britain can stay.
To show Parliament that they have the duty and the power to revoke if it is in the nation’s interests to do so, the Good Law Project is mounting a legal action that is currently crowdfunding here.

Members of the House of Lords have been scrutinising the European Withdrawal Bill and proposed amendments whilst the lower house debates it. Peers ask people to write their MPs now, and also to write both MPs and Peers if they are leave voters who, in light of events, no longer support the Hard Brexit of the Ultras. If you are or know someone who has changed their mind, #NowWeKnow is a good, non-judgemental hashtag.

Template for your MP letter was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

4-min video

https://vimeo.com/200837778

Follow #NoDust on Twitter here
Here is #NoDust on Facebook

Read more voices on #NoDust here

Video: Political Courage was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Note from Kate: Mel and I have worked together since the autumn, and I was always curious what the story of Co-Hub was. So one day we were chatting on messenger, and I asked.

Origins and Ethos

The origin of CoHub is simple. I saw a gap and filled it. The night of the referendum result, as I’m sure many of us did, I got very drunk. At around 2am I started a Facebook group for my friends. When I woke up, hungover, it had over 700 members.

Thankfully, The 48 and Beyond beat me to the punch on that one, but I still had 700+ people, desperate, angry, upset people looking for answers I didn’t have.

I went looking for those who maybe did, et voila CoHub was born. I live in France so if I throw in the odd bit of French, I’m not being pretentious, it’s just the best way to articulate my point.

It was never my intention to run things or decide strategy, I just wanted to find others, like me, who wanted to do something. I still do and I am, more than seven months on we are still going, still adding new members.

I’ve ‘met’ some truly inspirational people, but it’s not about individuals. Yeah I started this, but it’s not mine, it belongs to each and every member. Those who contribute make it what it is. I want more of that, it’s not only exciting to watch and be a part of, it’s necessary.

CoHub isn’t a brand in its own right and shouldn’t be, was never intended to be. It’s a collection of brands. A platform for those brands to communicate and collaborate where feasible. A notice board. The original idea was to collect everyone together so that we were ready when the strategy was clear.

I can see now that the strategy will never be that clear, things are changing too quickly. That’s why we need CoHub, to give choice, so that every thread of strategy can be followed by those who believe in it, but also so that they can work in tandem. Ensemble is a better word.

Think of it like a massive jigsaw puzzle, I relish puzzles. This one is constantly changing and evolving before our eyes. But wait, loads of the pieces are upside down, that’s no good. Help me turn them right way up, help me fit them together, help me build the whole picture.

An overview is essential for any kind of success. As far as I can see, nobody else is seeking this, everyone is head down in their own projects, maybe I am too. Point me in the direction of others who think like me and I will gladly help them and ask them to help you.

There are so many groups working themselves into the ground towards a common aim. So much duplication. This inevitably leads to confusion, which is divisive. Also to burnout, we’ve lost too many good people to that already.

Think about why everyone is so busy. Is it because they’re all individually doing the same things? Can that workload be shared more efficiently? In many cases, yes and yes.

CoHub isn’t advocating the need for one big group, many agree that this is counter-productive. Nobody will ever agree completely and we’ve already spent far too much time reaching that conclusion.

That said, there is absolutely no reason why two groups with slightly different aims can’t help each other to achieve those aims and get them to a wider audience. In turn, they can help other groups and create an ever expanding universe of aid and mutual understanding. It’s been happening for months.

Another analogy for you, we have Group A, Group B and Person X. This person likes elements of both groups so has joined each of them. They receive two emails about roughly the same subject, they become confused. Which do they follow? If they have also joined Groups C and D and they receive separate missives from them, the confusion mounts. Eventually person X switches off and gets on with their life, or diverts their energies to another less confusing cause.

I guess what I’m saying is, don’t force them to choose. We’ve all seen what happens when you force people to choose, that’s why we’re here!

We need to find a way to stop this division and confusion, we need every person X we can get. CoHub gives Groups A,B,C and D the tools to connect with each other. Granted those tools are not perfect, but they could be. If each group takes ownership, constructively points out the flaws, suggests how to fix them, gets involved in the evolution.

When it works it’s brilliant and it does work, is working, but it can and should be better. Help me to make it better. Sign your group up now, if you’re already a member get involved and if you’re already involved, thank you.

Thank you.

Mel C

Learn more at Co-Hub at http://cohub.network

How the Pro European Co-Hub was born was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Miranda Grell has worked in the European Commission, for ACAS, in the office of Londonʼs Deputy Mayor and served as a local councillor in Leyton. She joined hosts Dr Sara Houston and Dr Kate Hammer at NoDust to talk about her European identity and the loss she has felt since the EU Referendum.

10-min video

https://vimeo.com/204027320

Follow Miranda on Twitter @MirandaGrell and read her blog here.

Read more voices on #NoDust here

Video: Miranda Grell was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.

Ian Dunt is political editor for Politics.co.uk and author of Brexit: What the Hell Happens Now? published in late 2015 by Canbury Press. The new 2018 edition has just been published.

In January 2017, Ian spoke at #NoDust2 hosted by Dr Sara Houston and Dr Kate Hammer.

6.5-min video

https://vimeo.com/202982722

Follow Ian on Twitter @IanDunt

Read more voices on #NoDust here

Video: Ian Dunt was originally published in #NoDust on Brexit on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.