"It's not the Tories wot won it ; it's the opposition wot lost it".

As predicted the Tories won the general election. They didn't need a "guru" to win it for them, they just needed Corbyn and Swinson to lose it. And, they lost it big time. Allowing the governing party to hold a general election was naive and stupid. No wonder countries fail when we have politicians who have taken leave of their senses.

The same people who ran the "Remain" referendum campaign, and failed, organised the opposition to the Tory government. It is correct to say that working class "Leave" voters were treated with disdain and arrogance and they switched their votes in droves to the Conservatives.

I was brought up in a working class family and I think I know how the working class think. They do not want state handouts. They want secure employment which pays them enough to allow them to bring up their families without the need for benefits. They want decent housing without out being pushed from one tenancy to another. They want the opportunity to buy their own house. They want decent schools and above all a decent health service . And, they want this for their children. The working class want exactly the same things as the middle class. They don't particularly want riches but they want a fair crack of the whip. They want the dignity that has been afforded to the middle classes in the affluent South of England.

Successive governments have failed them and above all the Labour party. Wealth has been taken away from them and it has been passed to the rich. Wealth has not cascaded down as Margaret Thatcher promised, it has been sucked up under successive Labour, Conservative and Coalition governments.

None of Britain's social problems can be blamed on the EU; they are all home made. In Germany both the Social Democrats and Christian Democrats have looked after the ordinary citizen far better than British politicians have. The Germans have learnt to apply "real politics" to their social agenda rather than ultra- liberal or socialist ideology.

Lets face it, many working class people are xenophobes just like many middle class people are. It has been easy to blame foreigners and immigration for our predicament rather poor government policy. The working classes have a generosity of spirit and it is rather easy to reason with them that resentment of others is no good: of course, this generosity of spirit is given more freely when you are not being trodden on.

What are the working classes going to get from the Tory government? They have been promised equality of opportunity but just that. But what happens if poor housing and education and poverty prevent  you from exploiting your new found opportunities? You will be left on the scrap heap, just as you were before.

To leave the EU without a deal, which closely resembles what we have got now, will leave Britain poorer and with less tax revenue to improve the lives of the left behind. A trade deal with the US will not compensate for what we are losing, and Britain might have to sell the NHS to large US Corporations. Watch out.

The Conservatives have promised a lot to the disadvantaged but this means redistributing the wealth; large Corporations and the middle classes might come to resent this. So watch out again.

Divisions in  Northern Ireland and Scotland could lead to political and economic instability and who would suffer the most? You've guessed it.

Forty years in the EU has contributed to British economic success but the fruits of that success have not been distributed equitably. The EU has contributed to peace in Northern Ireland. What will happen when all this is taken away?

Most people, including those in the working class, will probably live to regret what will be taken away from them. Freedom of movement of labour may have been a small price to pay for continued social cohesion and economic development. So be it.

This is the worst General Election Campaign that I can remember

This year's UK general election campaign is the worst that I can remember in my 68 years. The campaign has been infected by lies, promises that cannot or will not be met, bluster and bull shit.

Real facts have been challenged by fake facts. All of the media are reporting unchallenged nonsense.

The BBC has been a disgrace it has not not critically examined the claims of politicians and has not exposed their lies and deceit.

Recently, a BBC journalist challenged the Labour party to provide evidence  about the poor behaviour of the 5 large corporations towards their employees - and rightly so. The BBC, however, at no time challenged the lies and deceit over Brexit and the new deal.

The electorate have been cheated. The only parties which are not lying and cheating are in a substantial minority. My vote will be going to the Green Party which attempts to put forward evidence based policies. I particularly like their idea of setting aside 15% of farmland which will be managed to improve the environment for wild life. They are also advocating that each school is twinned with a farm so that children will be able to see agriculture and animal husbandry at first hand and how this should fit into an improved ecology. These are the sort of intelligent, economical and practical measures which should be put forward to the electorate.

If the Conservative party wins they are going to execute a Brexit which will possibly be ruinous to the UK. Our standing in the world will be reduced. We will lose substantial trade agreements with the EU and with all the nations, such as Japan and Canada, which the EU has negotiated for us. Most of our current trading agreements will have to be renegotiated from a weaker position.

Britain will not get a trade agreement with the US unless the NHS is on the table. Britain could end up not having favourable trade arrangements with the EU, the US, Japan and Canada. It is shameful that a government would put us in this position. It is time for all politicians to tell the truth about Britain's future.

What is more shameful is the commercial and political position of Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland will be subject to the rules of two customs unions: the UK's and the EU's. Despite what the prime minister says there will be a commercial border between the Northern Ireland and Great Britain. This situation is a terrible mistake and both the UK and the EU could live to regret this.  The prime minister has not negotiated a super new deal better than Theresa May's but he has settled for what the EU proposed in the first place. He has caved in to the EU's demands. The loyalist community now know that they have been cheated. Conflict could return to Northern Ireland because of this.

Many people voted for Brexit as they saw this as a means to reduce immigration. If our economy is to thrive then we need immigrants both skilled and unskilled. If immigration stops then the economy, as it is modelled now, will fall into decline. EU citizens are leaving in droves from the NHS, the Finance industry and others: this will have to be reversed. The British people should be told the facts. People coming to our country improve the fabric of our society. They should not be feared and Britain should organise itself to accommodate them.

When we leave the EU there will not be enough money to fund the promises of the two major political parties. The electorate will have been deceived, Bexit voters will suffer the consequences as will Remain voters and those who did not vote. The 13 million of the electorate who did not vote in the referendum still expect the government to act in their interests. The best way for f the government to act in everyone's interests would be either to stay in the EU, or to leave but stay in the Customs Union and Single market. It is not in our national interest to remove ourselves from free trade agreements with the EU, Japan and Canada only to sell our country to the US in exchange.

I hope the electorate will vote wisely but I fear they will not.   The slow decline of the UK will start on Friday the 13th.

The British Political System has descended to a new level of banality

The British system of democracy is in a sad state. The ruling party is sustaining itself by lies and deceit and the worst kinds of fake news on social media. News organisations such as the BBC are afraid to hold the government to account. Recently a government minster announced during an interview with the BBC that Britain was going to plant 30 million trees to improve the environment. He claimed that when Britain leaves the EU it would be free to do so; he was implying that the EU was was holding Britain back. The interviewer should than have followed up with the question "what EU law is preventing Britain from planting these trees?" Of course, there is no such law; the  politician was are being allowed to get away with deceit.
The public is being confused by the most egregious propaganda full of deceit and false promises.

The opposition is no better; surely the leader of the Labour party should inform the public what is his personal opinion about Brexit. It is perfectly possible to be open about your opinion and still have the policy of renegotiating the Brexit deal and then asking the public whether they want to proceed with this new Brexit deal or stay in the EU. What is the leader of the opposition frightened of? The public deserve openness and the truth.

Both political parties are promising 10 billion here and 10 billion there: all over the place.  This is disingenuous. The nation will not be able to  afford any of these promises if it leaves the EU.The economy is dragging along in near recession and leaving the single market and customs union will make matters worse.

If we leave the single market we will probably lose large sections of our industry.

When we leave the EU our power as a medium sized state will be diminished. We will lose the trade deals we have as a result of our membership of the EU. We will lose our deals with Japan and Canada and other larger states; these trade deals will have to be renegotiated to try to maintain the status quo. Our position will be weakened without the EU. By leaving the EU we risk losing trade deals which already cover about 60% of world trade.  Leaving the EU is economically stupid. A weakened Great Britain will be at the mercy of China and the US. There will be no free lunches and no extra money to be spent on the NHS, the Police, Social Services or Education.

The Prime Minister has promised that the Brexit transition period will not be extended beyond 31st December 2020.  A new free trade deal with the EU will not have been negotiated by then.There is no hope of this being a successful political or economic strategy. In fact it will probably be an political and economic disaster. When we leave the EU we will lose most of our negotiating power.  The economic cliff edge will be re-awakened but with a vengeance. Increased tariffs and quotas will be placed on our exports to the EU , Japan and Canada etc and according to WTO rules - so much for our sovereignty. Every lorry will be stopped at Dover and the Channel Tunnel for their documents to be examined. The queues will be tremendous. There will be an economic border between the Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK; a recipe for conflict with the "loyalist" community of Northern Ireland. There will be no mitigation forthcoming from the EU.

 All of this is a prospect of economic stagnation and political conflict. Britain will be on its own.

It is quite likely that Scotland will push for a border poll and it will probably be successful this time.  The UK will be negotiating to split up before it has finalised an agreement with the EU: another recipe for chaos.

It is time for the major parties to spell out the consequences of  Brexit. The promises made to the voters about sovereignty and obeying EU law have already been broken because of the need to placate the EU over the Good Friday Agreement. The promises about ending freedom of movement for EU citizens will also be broken. Britain will have to make concessions over this otherwise we will not be able to negotiate a good free trade agreement, this broken promise will be dressed up in a fudge.

The leave voters have been duped by politicians of both sides. The best course of action would be to remain in the EU. The costs of leaving far outweigh the doubtful benefit - freedom to make trade deals which are worse than we have already got. It is time for politicians to tell the truth and the voting public to wake up. I doubt that this will happen and the slippery slope will get steeper. Britain's democracy is no longer fit for purpose as it allowing this to happen. We need proper constitutional change to improve our political system and democracy  otherwise we will sink into the mire.

The UK is now in a sad state.

All of our friends from continental Europe, the US and Australia think that the UK is bonkers to be leaving the EU. They can see things from the outside and from an objective point of view. They can see what will become of the country when we finally leave the EU.  It will become inward looking, more divided, politically and diplomatically weaker and economically weaker. Our friends can see that the UK has made a mistake. They see a country that has lost its self-confidence and which fears strangers rather than despises them. They see a country whose enterprises are owned and driven by Europeans, Americans and former Commonwealth nationals. British people, in the main, no longer have the self-confidence to compete and lead in an ever increasing international environment. Britain is lost and will probably split up: the Great Britain we once new will split up. New enterprises and investment will probably avoid Britain in the future to our social and economic detriment. I am surprised that there has not been a genuine financial crisis yet, but one is surely on the way if the division continues.

Successive governments and opposition parties have been naive. You cannot rule a country by using referendums unless there are checks and balances. Referendums can be very divisive and they should be used sparingly and wisely. An inward looking Britain has not learnt from other countries. Most sensible countries require a super majority before constitutional change is initiated. Most sensible countries make a decision only when the consequences of change are fully and honestly discussed, and they have constitutional courts which can annul a referendum or order a re-run if a campaign has not been run according to constitutional standards.

Australia has compulsory voting which means that everyone must vote. It also has rules which state that constitutional change cannot take place unless 4 out of 6 of its states agree to change, for this reason most referendums since the second world war have failed to institute change. No one complains that they have been cheated , the system ensures that the whole country is happy to accept the result within the rules.

In Britain we decided to hold an advisory referendum based on a first past the post system, which meant that a minority of the public decided that we should change the constitution.  Around 17 million voted to leave the EU, 16 million voted to remain and 13 million did not vote. Two of the 4 nations of the UK voted to remain in the EU and 2 voted to leave. The country was and still is completely divided. The decision to leave or remain was not based on the results of an objective assessment made by royal commission or similar body; it was based upon emotion and ideology. You cannot run a successful country like this.

The government and opposition were disingenuous to promise the population they they would implement the result of the referendum. If it was really their wish, then they would have made the result mandatory, in the first place, and we would have left by now. Most MPs , government ministers and opposition leaders know that leaving the EU will create great problems for our country. They have not have the courage to tell the people the result of the referendum should not be adhered to. Many in the population feel their opinion  and Brexit should be implemented; they were promised empowerment and they now assume the right to demand it.

It is quite clear that the government's deal will not solve the problems of Brexit. It will probably exacerbate them. Scotland will try for independence. Northern Ireland might try for independence too. If Scotland and Northern Ireland vote for independence,on a first past the post system, where the minority voices of  the unionists  and non-voters are not considered, then there will be be further division and possible violence. We are on dangerous ground.

I was a remain voter; I am prepared to compromise and leave the EU, but only if the UK stays in the customs union and single market. The single market and customs union will both help to maintain the unity of the UK and its economic well being. It is the common sense solution. Substantial proportions of the population, however, are adamant either to stay in the EU or Leave completely. And a substantial proportion of the population do not have an opinion. This is a recipe for further division.

We are pedalling in the swamp and we must be careful not to sink into it completely.  A general election or another referendum may not solve the divisions.  A wise choice would be to revoke the referendum result and admit to the mistake. A strong and democratic politician coming into power, such as Winston Churchill,
would admit to the errors and lead us to a solution . The trouble is, we do not have a strong and democratic leader and I fear worse is to come.

Be careful how you vote. Young people: think carefully about your future and be sure to go to the ballot box.

Brexit and Northern Ireland

The UK government, the government of the Irish republic (ROI) , the European Commission and the European Council have made a grave mistake by negotiating new terms for Northern Ireland regarding Brexit. They have all responded recklessly and they have collectively jeopardised the 1998 Belfast Agreement. It is no wonder that the Democratic Unionists Party of Northern Ireland (NI) are fuming mad.

The UK and the EU have agreed that a simple majority in the Northern Ireland assembly can authorise the Brexit arrangements for NI. This means that the Unionist community can be overridden in the NI Assembly, by a Nationalist majority, and that their voice can be silenced related to trade and single market arrangements for the province. The Belfast Agreement specifically states that there must be the parallel agreement of both the Nationalist  and Unionist representatives before major changes are implemented. What change could be more important than the constitutional relationship between NI, the EU and Great Britain.

Northern Ireland was promised that no border between the province and mainland Great Britain would ever be imposed by a British Government, but this is exactly what has happened with the new EU/UK withdrawal agreement. According to the terms of the agreement this will be imposed initially without the full consent of the NI Assembly. NI has been sold down the river.

British and EU politicians would do well to consider what happened in NI before the the 1998 Belfast Agreement: over 3,500 people lost their lives in what almost became all out civil war. That is thousands of Protestants, Catholics, Police and Soldiers who were murdered by both sides in the troubles.

British and EU politicians would also do well to consider how the Troubles between 1969 and 1998 started in NI. Initially, British troops were sent in to protect the Catholic community from protestant rioters. Very quickly the IRA rose up against the presence of the British Army and the Nationalist community started to resent the troops who had been sent in to guard them. The IRA and Ulster loyalist paramilitary groups then started bombing and shooting campaigns. Small sections of both communities took up arms to provoke violent disorder. The loss of innocent lives was dreadful.

The concept of the Belfast Agreement was to promote peace by ensuring that one community could not dominate the other. It also promoted connexions between the ROI, GB and NI, all within the context of  the UK and the ROI being part of the EU. Wresting NI from the EU will jeopardise the peace and most people in NI recognise this, that is why they voted by 55% to 45% to remain in the EU.

The Unionist community in NI feels strongly that their country should remain in the the UK. They feel this just as strongly as the Nationalists who yearn for a united Ireland. The Unionists will now feel that they have been treated unfavourably. They will have a justifiable grievance against the British and Irish governments who have effectively shafted them. Peace in Northern Ireland can only be guaranteed by treating both communities fairly and equitably.

The Belfast Agreement was only a staging post to permanent peace in Northern Ireland. Communities are still severely divided and most children go to schools that are either Catholic or Protestant ones.

The Chief of Police of NI  has warned that the province could easily slip back into violence on the streets if the Unionists feel that Brexit will be the cause of a united Ireland against their will.

We cannot afford to allow Northern Ireland to slip back into the division and violence of the 1960's and 1970's. The new Withdrawal Agreement could easily result in violent demonstrations on the streets, if ideological sections of the Unionist community feel cheated upon and threatened.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-50157743

No responsibly UK MP should support the NI clauses of the new EU Withdrawal Agreement, it would be to the shame of the UK parliament if they allow the Unionist community to be treated so shoddily. I hope that members of the European Parliament recognise this too.

There is only one way for the impasse to be resolved, and that is for the whole of the UK to remain in the  EU Customs Union and possibly the Single Market. This way would mean no borders between NI, the ROI and GB. There will then be no need to change the constitutional arrangements for NI. The peace will then be more secure.

Better still why not revoke Brexit? This shambles of a project to reduce everyone's rights and standards could only ever be a dog fight.

As I have said previously, the UK's power will be seriously weakened by Brexit, and this is witnessed by the ROI's insistence that the UK should agree to the EU's original proposal of a border between GB and NI just to preserve an open border in Ireland. Britain will be better off staying in the EU.
The EU, now, is the glue that holds the UK together and is the only way that the UK can prevent itself from being bullied by powers much stronger than Ireland.

It would be unforgivable if Brexit led to a return to violence in NI. All UK citizens should consider this. My compatriots  please wise up.

Poor old Badger

The latest scientific report to analyse the efficacy of the badger cull, in the UK west country, concludes that at best the cull has had a marginal effect on the spread of  bovine TB, and at worst the spread of this serous cattle disease is made worse. The results of the report are summarised here.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-49938943.

The government and the farming community have repeatedly ignored the scientific evidence. Bovine TB is mostly spread by poor animal husbandry. The disease is spread from cattle to wildlife and some wild species then harbour the disease. Poor cattle husbandry has allowed bovine TB to infect the population of wild badgers and other species.

The government's response has simply been block-headed, and their response is being egged on by farmers who are unwilling to accept the facts. Emotion is dominating evidence and reason. This is becoming increasingly apparent.

The cull is causing unnecessary distress and pain to the badgers. A civilised society should not be  turning to the gun to solve problems. I am not advocating direct action by any members of the public to halt this cruel culling but I recommend you that you use your vote and purchasing power carefully.

Vote of No Confidence in UK Government

Support for a national coalition in the UK parliament is in the making. Quite rightly, the opposition in the House of Commons has taken control of the legislative programme. They have been able to stop a general election. A general election would mean that parliament is dissolved. To dissolve parliament at such a critical time in the negotiations with the EU would be completely irresponsible - how would the government be held to account?


Equally, proroguing parliament is irresponsible but it offers the opportunity for  a recall, if all else is lost.

There is considerable opposition to a "no-deal Brexit" and MPs could stop this if they had the mind to. However, the united opposition are now obliged to present an alternative way forward.

It is apparent that the Government has no plan for the economy, the internal relations between the nations of the UK or the UK's external relations. They have no plan for what happens if we leave with or without a deal or remain. They are behaving recklessly; much to the shock of our EU partners and our allies such as Canada and Japan. The united opposition must develop a mitigation policy and present it to the public.

Ireland is one of the major stumbling blocks. There are really only two solutions to this impasse, and these are either to remain in the EU or to leave but stay in the single market and customs union. To propose a solution that Northern Ireland should remain in the single market and customs union, while the rest of the UK leaves both institutions will be to court disaster. The protestant population of Northern Ireland will not accept this.

Parliament should not accept "closing" either the border between the North and South of Ireland or between Northern Ireland and Great Britain. The potential for dissension would be great and could lead to violence returning to Northern Ireland: violence which could emanate from either or both of the competing communities. We have seen a mortar bomb  planted in Northern Ireland today. Britain plays with Northern Ireland politics at its peril - borders mean troubles and a possible return to violence.

Scotland is also another stumbling block: if Britain leaves the EU without a deal, and against Scotland's wishes then there will be a new demand for a border poll. This time a referendum for Scotland to leave the UK will succeed. How is the remaining part of Britain going to negotiate  a deal  with the EU, whilst at the same time negotiating a deal with Scotland to leave the UK? This would  create more problems.

Leave aside the economic difficulties: Britain will be weakened diplomatically if it leaves the EU: it will need a new strategy. Being part of the EU gives us power. If we leave the EU, then Malta will be more powerful than us - think about it.

The new united opposition must plan for a way forward. It should plan to revoke Article 50. If it cannot bring itself to do this, then it must agree with the EU that we remain in the single market and customs union. The latter solution will mitigate the effects on our economy and will go some way to solving the political difficulties surrounding Ireland and Scotland.

Leaving the EU without a deal cannot mitigate the damage that will be done to our power on the world stage. This damage will lead to further economic difficulties when we try to replace all the trade deals that we lose from leaving the customs union. We will also be at the economic mercy of the United States.

The united opposition should be ready to vote the government out of office and install a new prime minister to head a temporary government which will act in the national interest. Of course this premier must have his or her power limited. This could be done by a formal agreement but no one party could be dominant because it would not have a majority in parliament. The united opposition is obliged to act, but will it have the courage to do so and save our country from a potential disaster? 

No confidence vote against government in UK parliament

Why is Parliament agonising about having a no confidence vote against the government over Brexit. Let them sort out the mess they created. The present ministerial incumbents advocated Brexit and won an advisory referendum; there was no constitutional or legal obligation upon the UK government to invoke Article 50.

The legal process to approve the invocation of Article 50 was approved by Parliament. Parliament failed to ratify the EU withdrawal agreement and set the UK on a path to intense economic difficulties and the probable break up of the UK. Parliament, therefore , compounded the government's error.

The UK will also be faced with legal problems with its relationship with the EU. It also faces diplomatic weakness in its relations with the EU, the US and China. Young British citizens of the UK ,who do not enjoy dual nationality, will be deprived of their liberty to work, live and love in the  27 remaining countries of the EU; and this is for me the most depressing aspect of Brexit.

No-one who voted leave can provide a cogent and rational argument for how the UK can benefit from Brexit. The cost benefit analysis is heavily weighted in the cost column for diplomatic, legal, economic and social continuity and coherence. Most of the benefits are either marginal or are outweighed by the averse factors.

The best course of action would be for the UK Parliament to forget about a vote of confidence or a general election until either Brexit is revoked or delayed until a less damaging alternative is organised. I voted to remain but I would be prepared to compromise by voting for Britain to remain in the single market which I have advocated before. We could also remain in the customs union, and attempt to negotiate a say on who the union negotiate preferential trade deals with and their terms. My preference would be for a revoke decision, but I would be prepared to compromise as above. Ardent leavers have got no intention of compromising.

Staying in the single market and customs union would alleviate some of the adverse effects of Brexit but not all of them. We will still lose overseas investors and see our position as a middle ranking world power reduced. However, a disaster will be averted.

Parliament  should concentrate their time between now and October 31st on passing a law either to revoke article 50 or amend the EU Withdrawal Act - this would mean Parliament deciding and ratifying when the date of withdrawal from the EU would be effected. Amending the act would give time for a third referendum or a realistic compromise or both.

To do this, Parliamentarians need to have the courage to admit that they were wrong to invoke Article 50 in the first place.

They should explain why sensible countries require a two thirds majority to invoke a change to the status quo. They should explain why in Australia a general referendum result can only be effected if a majority of the states vote for it. In Australia voting is compulsory, so a first past the post result is truly representative of all of the electorate. These prior factors are reasons why Australia is able to hold referendums without causing division and dissension in the body politic of the whole of the federation and individual states. These are also reasons why most referendums in Australia fail to change the status quo.

The fixed Parliament Act states that the PM can only call a general election when is there is a two thirds majority in Parliament to approve it. I wonder why a two thirds majority is needed?  Also, if the opposition do not approve a vote of no confidence then the government is forced to stay in office. The government could easily be held to account to sort out the mess of their own making. Britain would remain in the EU until a sensible solution is found.

However, MP's will not have the courage to do this and we will probably leave the EU by default without a deal and our country will be the worse for it.

From a personal point of view, my wife and I have the resources and the passports to leave the UK to take up residence in one of the other 27 remaining EU countries. We both have extreme affection for the UK and its tradition of tolerance and liberty. The situation would have to get considerably worse, in our eyes, before we up sticks and left. Luckily, and as a last resort, we can emigrate; but the vast majority of our compatriots will be deprived of this right. Moving to the US or Australia is becoming increasing difficult. Voting to remove the right to free movement maybe something that leavers will regret, either for themselves or for  their children. The blue passport will end up just being that: Blue.

Populism and its ugly head.

Populism and nationalism ruined Europe in the 20th Century. The ruination culminated with the 2nd World War. 55 million people died. Millions of Jews were sent to the death camps and tortured. Hundreds of thousands gypsies and other minority groups also suffered in the same way.

It is sickening to see archive film of bombastic nationalists such as Hitler whipping up hysteria at rallies where adoring crowds saluted hatred and xenophobia. Hitler never achieved a majority in a general election but he was able to grab power. His nauseating regime assassinated any one that stood in its way.

A new type of populism and nationalism has arisen in Europe, which on the face of it looks much more benign than that of Hitler, Mussolini or Franco. The leaders of the new nationalists and populists do not appear to be dangerous but who is to say that they will not be replaced by politicians who are much more sinister. Who is to say that the crowds cannot be whipped up into more dangerous adulation.

Young people watch out your future which could be endangered by division and possibly war between the nationalist and internationalist states in Europe. Vote with your heads and with reason to defeat the forces of division and destruction.

NASA to return to Moon in the next 5 years

NASA plans to land men and women on the moon in the next five years. They have already learnt how to do this and have the technology. There is no reason why this cannot be achieved. After the next manned landings they intend to develop a permanent moon station.

https://www.nasa.gov/press-release/nasa-administrator-statement-on-return-to-moon-in-next-five-years

The moon landings will then be used as a staging post for landing on Mars and build a permanent human presence there.

I am all in favour of of human space exploration and scientific discovery. However, I am not in favour of "terra-forming" Mars to make the whole planet suitable for human occupation. This would be an intensely difficult if nigh on impossible task. Trying it and failing would do immense damage to the planet. Doing it and succeeding would also create immense damage. There is a strong possibility that life existed on Mars; if we contaminate the planet with earth microbes and fungal spores we will destroy any chance of discovering the evolutionary processes which lead to life on the red planet. If life still exists on Mars it is likely that human intervention will destroy any life that has a precarious existence on Mars.

Humans will find all sorts of excuses as to why we should establish a population on Mars.

We are busily setting about making our own planet uninhabitable, we may need to emigrate to a new one. I say fix our own planet before we consider emigrating to a new one. Why spoil another planet? If we fix our own planet then there is no need to go to Mars other than for scientific exploration.

Earth could be hit by an asteroid and be destroyed so we need an escape plan. Well, Mars is equally as likely to be hit by an asteroid and all our good works could be destroyed by a space rock. It might be more economic to develop a means of protecting ourselves from an asteroid hit.

Earth could become over populated and we will need to expand. The way things are going, we will voluntarily cull our population through climate change , pollution and the complete man-made erosion of our soil. It would be far better to maintain a sustainable population on our own planet.

The whole idea of "terra-forming" Mars is a mad and selfish venture. The only question is: when will it start?

Young people make sure you vote for the UK - EU elections 2019

No matter what your opinion, it is important that you vote in the 2019 EU elections for the UK. Many young people believe that it is not worth voting or couldn't care less. You will be voting for your future. It is ironic that older people take the time to vote. I shall be voting I am 68 years of age. I shall be dead before the full effects of Brexit will be felt.There are many things to consider and probably the top most priority is climate change. And following that it is pollution. Do you want to live in a world that can sustain itself? Europe has woken up and is now leading the way politically if not in terms of action. Devising  policies for climate change and pollution needs co-operation in Europe and Britain should be part of this. This is good reason enough for remaining as part of the EU.

Do you want the NHS to be privatised? Do you want to eat chlorine washed chicken? Do you want free and easy capitalism designed just for the rich but not for you? Do you want reciprocal measures taken against you to prevent your free movement  to work and love in Europe? Do you want the UK government to make it very difficult for you to live in the UK with a foreign partner?

The EU guarantees that you can live in the UK with a foreign partner or spouse without restriction. Do not let prejudice prevent you from having this most basic of human rights.

If you want your life restricted then you know who to vote for. If you want freedom and some sort of chance of a sustainable life then you know who not to vote for to vote for - it is your choice.

The Brexit supporters say as a matter of principle that they do not want to live in a country which is dictated to by un-elected leaders. Well ask them, who elected the head of the World Trade Organisation and who elected the head of Nato?  These are two organisations with which we share our sovereignty and to our advantage. We either indirectly or directly vote for the leadership of the EU we have a much greater say in what policies the EU follow.

Who elected our Head of State? No-one, so are Brexiters republicans as a matter of principle? Ask them what are their principles? They have no answers about sovereignty, climate change, pollution and your freedom to chose where you live and with whom.

The EU elections are not another referendum but they are your opportunity to make your views felt. Young people go out and vote for your future .

Israel Folau

Israel Folau has been sanctioned by the Australian Rugby authorities for making anti-gay comments. He is reputed to have published the following comment on social media: “hell awaits” for “drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists, idolators”. He encourages those that he criticises to repent and turn to Jesus.

I can't see the problem with fundamental Christians making such comments: they are after all just opinions.

There is no doubt that Israel Folau would consider me to be an atheist and that I am condemned to hell. I don't feel in the least bit offended by this. The only thing I would say to Israel is: where is the evidence that hell exists? And if there is a God, what evidence is there that he or she would send gays  or fornicators  there? The answer is none. Israel is being irrational. There is no need to take offence.

As long as Israel does not deliberately foul opponents who he believes to be  “drunks, homosexuals, adulterers, liars, fornicators, thieves, atheists or idolators”, then I suggest that we let him get along with his game. You are what you do but not what you say. Christianity precludes violence and encourages forgiveness does it not?

He is a great rugby player and his religious opinions are his own and do not need to be taking seriously, just let him play rugby.

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2019/may/07/israel-folaus-rugby-australia-code-of-conduct-likely-to-run-into-fourth-day

Caster Semenya

It is both irrational and immoral to ban miss Semenya from running unless she takes medicine that reduces her naturally "high" level of testosterone in her blood. She has been proven to be woman both genetically and physically. The scientific evidence is in her favour. She is not cheating.

All of us have varying levels of both oestrogen and testosterone in are blood and if a natural higher level of testosterone gives an athlete an advantage - then so what. Longer legs give jumpers and advantage. There is no doubt that being tall gave Usain Bolt an advantage. Bolt rarely got beaten; is anyone suggesting that he should have been handicapped to level the field? No one tries to ban men with naturally occurring high levels of testosterone; so why should women?

It would seem that miss Semenya's times come no where near to challenging the times of the elite men in the same events. Why therefore should she be banned fro female competition? There is little evidence to suggest that other female athletes are withdrawing from competition against her. It also seems that male sprinters were not driven out of the the sprinting events because of Bolt's dominance. They just strove harder to compete.

The IAAF and CAS have done their best to eliminating cheating in their sport from athletes using performance enhancing drugs. It is now ironic that they should prevent some athletes from competing unless they take performance reducing drugs. Surely this is both irrational and immoral. Medicine should not be driven to the the cause of administrating unnecessary and possibly damaging treatment.

It is time for a rethink based upon science, evidence and common sense. Miss Semenya should be allowed to run without medical treatment for a condition that does no harm to her or her sport.

https://theconversation.com/caster-semenyas-impossible-situation-testosterone-gets-special-scrutiny-but-doesnt-necessarily-make-her-faster-116407

UK Parliamentary Sovereignty

In the 2016 Referendum regarding EU membership there is at least one thing that most voters agreed upon: the UK parliament is sovereign. Members of Parliament decide upon the law of the land and can over rule the government. The 2016 referendum was only advisory; the government and parliament were not legally obliged to implement its result. If the referendum had been mandatory we probably would have left the EU by now. Also, the supreme court made clear to the government that the executive could not take  the UK out of the EU without the approval of parliament.

It is obvious that referendums should not be mandatory. What would happen if a UK government was mandated by the Northern Irish electorate to arrange for Northern Ireland to be incorporated into the Republic of Ireland and the civil war broke out again? The UK government would be under pressure to revoke such a referendum to ensure the peace.

What would happen if there was a mandatory referendum to abolish the Monarchy and it won by just one vote in a first past the post system. Royalists would quite rightly feel cheated upon especially if a substantial number of people did not vote in such a referendum. How would the Northern Irish feel if England and Wales voted for a Republic but Northern Ireland voted to retain the Monarchy.

Referendums are dangerous if they are not managed properly. The 2016 referendum should only have been made mandatory if there was a super majority to change the status quo and also only if a majority of the constituent nations of the UK voted for it. The 2016 referendum left us with a divided nation  and union which is becoming more divided by the minute.

The divisions within the governing Tory party and its  reliance upon the DUP have left the Prime Minister in a weak state to negotiate a satisfactory deal with the EU, which is both economically, diplomatically and militarily more powerful than the UK. The withdrawal agreements reflects this balance of power. It binds the UK into the economic and political orbit of the EU without a say in decision making. It is simply a terrible deal for the UK. The DUP are right about at least one thing; it is unacceptable that Northern Ireland should be held in the single market whilst the UK breaks away. Whilst Northern Ireland legally remains in the UK it should not be treated any differently on the international or diplomatic front.

Scotland voted to remain in the EU and its views should be taken into account. It is not lost on Scotland that the Republic of Ireland has now become diplomatically more powerful than the UK as a result of its continuing membership of the EU. Eventually the Scots will vote to leave the UK, if we leave the EU, and they will openly be welcomed by Bruxelles. The EU is now the glue that holds the UK together.

Gibraltar will be  in a precarious position if the UK leaves the EU. Gibraltar will then be recognised by the EU as a colony of the UK. Spain will then have the right to call for its decolonisation and the EU will be obliged to follow that decision. Membership  of the EU prevents  revanchism and its claims.

It is quite possible that a United Kingdom which leaves the EU could be faced with the stresses of deciding a new relationship with the EU whilst negotiating  with Scotland after a border poll for it to leave the UK. Add to that the possibility of the  troubles starting again in Northern Ireland because the rest of the UK has denied them a say on their future.  You then have a recipe for a severe, political, economic and diplomatic crisis.

I surmise that the Prime Minister has contemplated revoking Brexit.

Parliament is sovereign and it has a duty to represent the interests of everyone in the country. This includes the 13 million people who did not vote in the referendum and the youngsters who were not old enough to vote. It is not the will of the people that Brexit should either be executed in full or in disastrous part.

Parliament is quite entitled to change its mind, after it has voted for Brexit to be implemented, especially after the poor deal which has been negotiated. If parliament could not change its mind we would still have badger baiting as a sport. Women would be imprisoned for having back street abortions and you would still be obliged to pay a tax to the Church of England.

 A sovereign parliament exists to protect you from stupid actions such as going to unnecessary wars with your neighbours or declaring a Republic based on a one vote majority.

The Prime Minister has looked over the political and economic cliff edge and does not like what she sees. That is why she goes cap in hand to Bruxelles to ask for an extension to EU membership. If the referendum had been mandatory we would already be looking at political, economic, diplomatic, and administrative chaos. Scotland would probably have been on the way out of our precious union.

Parliament has protected us from the worse excesses of Brexit. Hopefully, it will vote to get us the best deal possible which is to Remain in the EU. All this trouble from a poorly conceived and managed referendum and its aftermath - was it really worth it?

The Christchurch Atrocity

How do we stop atrocities such as occurred in Christchurch today from happening. We can start by changing the way we think about race, religion and migrants.

We need to base our thinking upon evidence and our opinions upon defending human rights.

All the scientific evidence points to there being only one human race; from a genetic point of view we are all almost identical. The colour of your skin cannot define you as part of one race or another any more than the colour of your eyes. Possibly the Neanderthals were members of the same species, Homo sapiens, as us, but they were a separate "race". They died out 30,00 years ago to leave just one human race : us. It really is ignorant to believe that your neighbour could be a member of a separate race from you. There can be no white supremacy or black supremacy. Every child at school should be educated to believe that there is only one human race based upon the scientific evidence.

The constitution of the republic of France has been amended to delete all reference to race, to recognise the scientific evidence, but of course the constitution recognises that every citizen deserves the equality of treatment by law.

Human beings originated somewhere in Africa and subsequently spread across the world. This means that every American is an African American by descent and skin colour has nothing to do with this African heritage. Early human beings spread across the world therefore we are all the descendants of migrants, we are all the sons and daughters of immigrants.

To distinguish between individuals based upon the false view of race or immigration status is both irrational and immoral and further more it is dangerous. Let every child be taught this at school and by their parents.

Religion has been with us since humans existed. However, you are not born a Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu or Buddhist. Children were being born before any of these religions existed. You are educated and encouraged by the society that you live in to follow a religion. It is, however, a matter of personal choice. You can be forced to show the outward signs of a religious faith but you cannot be forced to believe. There is no doubt that some people can lose their faith and belief. And there has probably been an atheist Pope who was feeling too physically comfortable to resign.

It is your human right to believe in whatever religion you want and to practise that religion. It is your human right not to be persecuted or murdered for your faith. Equally, it is your human right to be a non-believer and it is your right not to be persecuted. It should be your human right not to be punished or persecuted for changing your religion or to become an open apostate. It should be your right to be treated equally to every one else if you are a homosexual.

I am not a believer in any religion but I respect others rights to believe. Sometimes, I go into churches for family occasions and weddings etc. : just for cultural reasons. I am certain that some Muslims and Jews feel the same way as me. In fact I know that they do, I have worked with " Muslims", "Jews" and "Christians" who are atheists but hide it from their families; who am I to expose them.

Most of the worshippers in the mosques in Christchurch were praying for peace and a good life. They were harmless and good people and citizens. Some of the attendees could have been atheists and agnostics but were in the mosque for friendship and solidarity reasons. No one has the right to harm them in a hate filled attack whatever their reasons for being in a place of worship.

Every human being has the right to live in peace, whatever their background, migration status, religion, sexuality or skin colour.

If all of us do not recognise this, there will always be some crazed individual who will ignore the science and the value of human rights, and who will commit atrocities.

Lets  change the world and lead our  lives according to the scientific evidence and the recognition of human rights.

Clean Hard Brexit

Surely, whether you are a Brexit supporter or not you must admit to yourself that the whole political process has been a fiasco. We are now 4 weeks away from leaving the EU, and if there is no political intervention to either ratify the withdrawal agreement or delay Brexit then we leave without a deal. We make a clean break.

The short term consequences of a clean break are tremendous. The nation is simply not ready to leave from a legal, economic and administrative point of view.

The long term consequences are worse.

Freedom of movement between the EU and the UK will stop. This does not mean that immigration will either stop or even be reduced as promised; all the evidence suggests that immigration will continue unabated unless there is some sort of economic recession which makes the UK unattractive for economic migrants.

 A clean break will mean that people who do not have any means of obtaining dual UK/EU nationality will become second class citizens. Irish citizens will have the right to work and live in the UK and the right to live and work in the EU. Any EU citizen, with UK indefinite leave to remain, will also have the right to live  and work in the UK and the EU. British young people who do not have such privileges will be at the back of the queue to work for big international companies. There will be no escaping Britain to go to work in the EU, or anywhere else for that matter, if there is an increase in unemployment.

You had better hope that your son or daughter does not fall in love with a partner  from the EU; the EU partner will not be able to come to live in the UK so you might find your son or daughter setting up home in the EU. You might need a visa to go and visit them.

Britain will lose a lot of diplomatic power. The government recently threatened to send an aircraft carrier to the South China sea. In response China broke off trade talks - brilliant.

The USA will take us to the cleaners negotiating a new trade deal, as our country will be almost powerless to resist chlorinated chicken, reduce food standards and the partial privatisation of the NHS by US companies. The UK will have Investor State Dispute Settlements forced upon us - the sovereignty of the UK will be compromised - another broken promise.

If we have a clean break from the EU then we will lose all of  the free trade deals negotiated on our behalf by the Commission. Trade deals of which we have had a major say. We lose everything including the free trade deal with the EU, Canada, Japan, South Korea and Mexico etc. We will be left with temporary free trade deals with Switzerland and the Faroe islands. We will have to start from scratch. It will be like committing a trade war against ourselves. It is mad.

When we leave the single market, Japanese investment in UK industry will almost entirely disappear which means most of our car industry will disappear and their ancillary industries. All governments, since the Thatcher government, have guaranteed that the UK will stay in the single market. To the Japanese, the UK will have been seen to have acted in bad faith or even dishonourably. Britain will suffer because of this.

Perhaps, the worse aspect of a hard Brexit will be the damage that will be done to our relationship with Ireland and the Good Friday Agreement.  A hard border in Ireland could lead to social disorder and possibly a return to terrorist violence both in Ireland and in the UK . Do we really wan to return to the troubles even if the risk is small?

Brexit could even lead to the dismantlement of the UK. There is a fair chance that Scotland and Northern Ireland will vote for a split from the UK. This will mean further legal, economic and administrative disruption.

The EU has helped maintain the peace in Europe after centuries of warfare. The UK breaking away could inspire others. Disunity in Europe could lead to renewed conflict.

Why should the UK take the risk of Brexit? Brexiter politicians have no plan for what happens after we leave. They have broken their promise that the transition would be smooth. They have no plan to improve the economic, political and administrative position of the UK after we leave.

We are facing chaos.

If the worse comes to the worse then Leave voters will have no moral right to complain. Everyone will suffer excepting the rich elite - Leaver and Remain elites the like. Leave voters voted in the referendum to improve their lives; their hopes will have been dashed. I hope that they demonstrate their disappointment peacefully.

Brexit hokey pokey

As predicted the whole Brexit project is becoming a farce and our nation is becoming an international laughing stock.

Leave voters have been completely deceived and continue to be deceived. Brexit politicians continue to short the public by making more and more ridiculous assertions.

Everything is not going to be wonderful on the night. If we leave the EU without a deal then there will be severe commercial consequences.

Customs controls between the UK and the EU will have to be implemented and there is the potential for chaos at the borders.  There will be long queues. Holland and France have recruited hundreds more customs officers. What do Brexit politicians think they will be doing? Playing snap: no they will be inspecting lorries for contraband, compliance with EU customs rules and security.

The last time I passed through the border posts at the Eurotunnel it was easy to see a queue of cars building up to a kilometre long, even though it was a quiet day and most car checks were only taking two minutes. What will happen when thousands of lorries are subjected to customs checks which also include scanning for "illegal" migrants etc.

Hauliers will be reluctant to send lorries across the channel if they are stuck in queues wasting time and money whilst going and coming back.

The whole idea of a customs union and single market was to save lots of time and money; if you pull out of membership of both these institutions, then you lose the commercial benefits of being part of the biggest and most comprehensive free trade area ever invented. It's bonkers, we will be worse off for ever.

The Brexiters have not got anywhere near replacing the the free trade deals that we have with other nations as a result of being in the customs union. They have proposed joining the pacific free trade area which consists of Japan, Canada, Mexico, Australia and New Zealand. Hey presto, the EU customs union has already got agreements with Japan, Canada and Mexico and also South Korea thrown in. We shall lose all of the agreements if we leave without a deal and replacing them will take years. This is shooting yourself in the foot.

The Trade Secretary was boasting at Davos that the UK had signed a free trade deal with Israel  - in principle. And guess what, we already have a free trade trade by courtesy of the EU, so it's back to square one.  Why not put this on the side of a red bus.

The biggest and most colossal mistake of the negotiations to make our country worse off and weaker socially and diplomatically is the problem of the Northern Irish border with the EU. The Brexiters are treating the Northern Irish and the Irish with contempt. It is obvious to most rational people  that the Belfast Agreement has preserved the peace in both the UK and Ireland for many years. The Belfast Agreement is underpinned by membership of the EU with open borders and tariff and quota free trade, along with standardised phyto-sanitary standards for agriculture. If you put any of this in jeopardy then you could easily compromise the peace. You also jeopardise the living standards of both communities on either side of the border. Ireland as a whole deserves better than to be cheated on once again by the British.

The Brexiters were prepared to sell Northern Ireland down the river, in the initial negotiations, by conceding to the EU that there should be a customs border between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK. When Northern Ireland politicians complained, the Brexiteers insisted that the only solution was for the UK, as a whole, to stay in the customs union as a temporary measure. This temporary measure -the backstop- would remain in place until both the EU and the UK agreed it would stop. The withdrawal agreement was signed only for the UK parliament not to ratify it. The UK government now wants to change the withdrawal agreement by annulling the back stop - a backstop which they insisted upon. It is no wonder that the EU says no - they simply do not trust the UK.

To add to the confusion it is clear that the UK will not be ready either commercially, legally or administratively to leave the EU without a deal on the 29th of March: the UK will probably ask for an extension of EU membership. The EU will extract more concessions from the UK to allow this. Spain could ask for Gibraltar back - Gibraltar voted 99% to stay in the EU and the UK.

The English nationalist Brexiters have also sold Scotland down the river. To encourage Scotland to vote, in their independence referendum, to stay in the UK they promised continued EU membership. Naturally, the Scots feel let down by Brexit and they will undoubtedly press for a further independence referendum.

One of the worst aspects of Brexit is the sell out of most of our youth who will be denied free movement even if we get a deal. The EU was one of the last regions of the world where young Britons were free to roam, work and love. Luckily, for them, the youth of Northern Ireland will be able to get Irish citizenship which will allow them to move freely in both the EU and the UK.This will give them an advantage over their now second class brothers from Manchester, Liverpool and London who might not have Irish connections. The DUP should beware, if you drive the youth of Northern Ireland to obtain Irish passports they will no doubt feel more Irish and will feel more inclined to vote for Irish unity.

Brexiters have sold Scotland, Ireland and Gibraltar down the river. They have also sold the UK down the river but worse of all they have sold their leave voters down the river. It is no wonder the UK is a divided, confused and unhappy state None of the Brexit promises will ever be kept. If we leave without a deal on the 29th of March 2019 it will be no use crying, demonstrating or complaining. It will be too late and it will take years to get back to the status quo, indeed if ever. The UK will be lost.

Political Abuse

It is unacceptable for anyone to be subjected to violence or abusive insults for expressing their political beliefs. Freedom of expression is enshrined in the constitution of some countries such as the US and France and it is enshrined in law in the UK.It must be defended at all costs.

It does not matter whether it is Nigel Farage sitting down for a pub lunch in Downe Kent, with his family. Whether it is Jacob Rees-Mogg being mobbed outside of his home or Anna Soubry outside of Parliament.

All MP's should be allowed to carry out their business without death threats. Political based murder is both completely cruel and unjustified. UK MP's are not evil people and they deserve respect.

It is not just MP's who are affected by thuggish behaviour: it is families, journalists and workers who are associated with them who are also victims.

When I was a youngster I was taught not to be abusive or violent towards women. Equality for women does not mean that they should be treated with contempt. The same applies to ethnic minority people or gay people. Men in general should also be treated with equal respect.

Shouting down journalists because they happen to be women is cowardly. Every journalist is entitled to equal respect.

If we are not careful Britain will sink into a morass of abuse and insults and perhaps, even worse, more political violence.

It is time for the abuse and insults to stop we can all do better than this.