Record number of Candidates standing in the Elections for Mayor of London

Official List of Mayor of London Candidates for 2021 Elections

Since due to the situation generated by the Covid-19 pandemic the Elections due to take place last year were suspended, the candidates will be standing for office of Mayor of London for the next three years.

We have been informed that the full list of candidates for London-wide Assembly Members elected by proportional representation will be announced by London Elects.

The full list of Constituency Assembly Members elected by the system First-Past-the-Post will be announced by each relevant Constituency Returning Officers.

The complete list of all Maytor and London Assembly candidates will be published together on the London Elects website as soon as they are all available.

The following list indicates the order in which the names of the candidates will be printed on ballot papers including their chosen party or independent description. 

BAILEY Shaun                              Conservative Party Candidate

BALAYEV Kam                             Renew

BERRY Sian                                  Green Party

BINFACE Count                           Count Binface for Mayor of London

BROWN Valerie                          The Burning Pink Party

CORBYN Piers                             Let London Live

FOSH Max                                    Independent

FOX Laurence                             The Reclaim Party

GAMMONS Peter                      UKIP

HEWISON Richard                     Rejoin EU

HUDSON Vanessa                      Animal Welfare Party – People, Animals, Environment

KELLEHER Steve                         Social Democratic Party

KHAN Sadiq                                 Labour Party

KURTEN David                            Heritage Party

LONDON Farah                           Independent

OBUNGE Nims                            Independent  

OMILANA Niko                           Independent

PORRITT Luisa                             Liberal Democrats

REID Mandu                                Vote Women’s Equality Party on orange

ROSE Brian                                  London Real Party

 

Greater London Returning Officer, Mary Harpley, said:

“The Mayor and the London Assembly hold important and powerful roles. The winning Mayoral candidate will be responsible for issues that affect every Londoner – from transport and policing, to housing and the environment. 2016 saw a then-record number of 12 Mayoral candidates.  This year, there will be 20, the largest number yet.

 

“It’s up to Londoners to make a decision on who will run the capital for the next three years.  Our website www.londonelects.org.uk tells you everything you need to know about these elections and what the Mayor and London Assembly Members are responsible for. Remember also to look out for the booklet coming through your letter box in April.”

 

Voters will receive three ballot papers when they go to vote: one for the Mayor, one for the London-wide Assembly Members and one for the Constituency Assembly Members.

 

A list of parties and independent candidates standing in the London-wide contest will follow. 

 

Fourteen London Assembly Members are also elected to represent London’s 14 Assembly Constituencies.

 

Nominations for the Mayor of London and London Assembly elections closed at 4pm on March 30. The Greater London Returning Officer is required by law to publish the list by 4pm on Thursday April 1.

 

London Elects will send an information booklet to each of London’s 6 million registered voters shortly, with a ‘mini manifesto’ from 17 of the Mayoral candidates, the full list of Assembly candidates and information about how to vote.  To include a mini manifesto in the booklet, candidates were required to pay a £10,000 fee set in law.

Important dates:  These dates apply to both the Mayor and the London Assembly.

Polling station voting:                    Thursday 6 May 2021 (polling stations open from 7am to 10pm)

Count commences:                         Friday 7 May (9am) and continues Saturday 8 May (8am)

If you are registered to vote, you should have received your poll card already.

The last day to register to vote in the Mayor of London and London Assembly elections is 19 April 2021.

To vote by post, electors need to register as a postal voter by 5pm Tuesday the 20^th of April.

For more information, please contact the London Elects media office.

London Elects Head of Media:

Alison Bell - 07887 832 918 or 020 7983 4228 – City Hall

media@londonelects.org.uk

www.londonelects.org.uk   

Follow us on Twitter @londonelects

1. A full list of candidates standing in the Mayoral contest, London-wide contest and each of the 14 constituency contests will be available at https://www.londonelects.org.uk/im-voter/candidates

 

2. Candidate and party descriptions are given as on the nomination forms submitted by candidates. This is how they will appear on the ballot papers (along with party emblems).
3. The election itself will see nearly 3,900 polling stations set up across London on 6th May. The stations will be staffed by more than 12,000 people between 7am and 10pm. Another 2,000 staff will then be on hand to help with the count.

 

4. London Elects is the body responsible – under the direction of the Greater London Returning Officer (GLRO) – for delivering and encouraging participation in the Mayor of London and London Assembly elections.  

Britain is committing suicide

The announcement in the House of Commons that Britain is going to proceed to disarm itself coincides with increases of numbers and combat readines in China, in Russia and elsewhere. What the announcement made by Ben Wallace MP - Secretary of Defense - shows is that Britain has failed to recruit enough numbers. In a desperate effort to increase conscription, there was an attempt to contract forces from overseas to beef up the numbers in the United Kingdom. It also failed and now to try and hide the fact that not enough able men and women show any interest in joining British Armed Forces or are physically fit to join British Armed Forces, the Secretary of State brought to the House of Commons a bill that is nothing more than the official acceptance of the fact that Britain is in trouble. 

Immigration does not provide Britain the right candidates for its Armed Forces. There is an inherent risk of bringing into the Armed Forces individuals whose values, religion and ideology together with the fact that they have roots in countries Britain could be forced to engage in wars make them a liability.

As events in Manchester, in London and in other cities have proven, even those born and bred in Britain show no allegiance to Britain. They even choose to travel abroad to join the enemies of Britain.

In 1982, Margaret Thatcher made a mistake that proved to be catastrophic in spite of the fact that Britain managed to expel Argentinian forces from the South Atlantic islands. It came at a huge cost. Deprived of enough airpower, Britain sent British troops to their death to be killed before they even landed on the islands. Argentina was not a major player. It was not a naval power, its armed forces were made up mainly of conscripts that joined at a late hour and only had its Airforce as a major asset with missiles provided by Israel and France.

Today, the dangers are much greater. Britain's enemies very well know Britain's weaknesses. Whether there is Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria or Yemen - of all places, Britain can only play second fiddle to American forces and American capabilities.

Ben Wallace MP's idea is basically wars by proxy using elements on the ground or supporting elements on the ground. No one rational would think that you can face the world in a real conflict with merely 70,000 men and women under flag. Lower number of men and women under flag dramatically increases the risk of a rising number of casualties should a real conflict occur. Ben Wallace MP also underestimates the risk of internal operations in Britain by individuals acting as proxy forces for foreign countries. What are the potential targets? British nuclear reactors, Communications and Transport to name a few. 

Some time ago, Dame Stella Rimmington, then head of MI5 stated loudly and clearly that the Security Services didn't have the necessary manpower to follow every lead and that people who were potential risks for Britain were going under the radar. In real war, Britain used commandos with relative success. The actions of foreign commandos in the United Kingdom is not unthinkable in a world with very open borders. In a then European Union with extremely porous borders and easy access to passports in which people could travel across the continent without any controls, it was reasonable to expect that potential aggressors would go easily undetected.

But even today, with Britain out of the EU, the danger is considerable. For the moment, attacks have been against civilians by individuals driven by hatred and a desire for revenge or trying to make a point. Britain still has to face a deliberately planned military attack from within against key targets. If terrorists had targetted, for example, the London Underground by flooding tunnels, instead of tens of victims, we would be potentially talking about hundreds of thousands dead on a busy day. Such kind of attack is not inconceivable given the fact that despite permanent efforts, the underground system is prone to flooding.

Ben Wallace MP's approach to defense is extremely short-sighted. Let's be reminded of the words of Sergei Ivanov, once again.: wars in Europe will be carried out with conventional weapons. The use of nuclear weapons is unthinkable because it would involve mass destruction of all sides. 

The build up of military capabilities in the Sea of China is not about nuclear weapons. It is about conventional forces. Any aggression would become a fait accompli because Western Nations couldn't possibly commit enough forces to prevent or to reverse any aggression. This is why in recent years, we only hear about economic sanctions and counter economic sanctions and a war of words. 

Dear Ben Wallace MP,

You might think that reducing the number of troops make good sense because you intend to carry on waging wars by proxy using local combatants or guerrillas to do the job and you might think that this strategy can be maintained for ever and ever. But in the real world it doesn’t work.

You might be too young to remember what happened in 1982, right before the Argentine invasion. Margaret Thatcher was mothballing the British Armed Forces. In a panic, Britain had to rethink the strategy overnight and had not been the for the Harrier Jump Jets Britain would have lost the war in the South Atlantic because after Argentina captured the one and only airstrip on the islands there were no available airstrips to provide British forces the crucial air cover that they needed. Now again, you are making the same mistake and there is talk again of potential trouble in the South Atlantic. How are you going to react if you don’t have the means to do the job? In a few years, Britain lost about 30,000 troops after successive reductions. How are you going to manage in a real conflict?

I know you have been having trouble recruiting new personnel. Most of those who come forward to join the Armed Forces are not fit for purpose. This is why the Conservative government launched a scheme aimed at recruiting personnel from overseas. It hasn’t worked either. Now, you talk about reducing then level of British Armed Forces by natural wastage – you were asked in Parliament about redundancies and you said that redundancies were going to be avoided by depending only on natural wastage when people leave the Armed Forces without being pushed out.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson recently announced an increase of 44% of  nuclear missiles, but this doesn’t change the reality that nuclear missiles are a weapon that will only be used when everything else has failed. I bring to your attention the words of Sergei Ivanov who said that any conflict in Europe – and presumably elsewhere – will still be fought with conventional forces. You know as well as I know that nothing is won until the ground is secured. Lack of enough manpower leads to bigger casualty numbers and lack of effectiveness.

You talk about standing up to China. How are you going to do that when China mobilizes its military machine? Talk about the Sea of China and the territorial disputes between China and India related to rich oil deposits. Talk about the Philippines that recently expressed alarm when vast numbers of Chinese ships got closer to their shores as part of a Chinese effort to assert its predominance in the region? Drones? Un-manned aircraft? Nuclear missiles?

When we came out of the EU, you and your colleagues spoke about enforcing Britain’s rights in British territorial waters? How are you going to do that? Do you have enough ships to patrol British waters?

For years and years, the Conservative Party has had a tendency to cut down while talking about increasing investment to keep up with NATO quotas.

You only have to look at the trends in the East to understand that you are saving the penny and losing the pound and you are doing it in a way that will cost lives.

They say that Keir Starmer is failing as Labour Party leader because he is not offering effective Opposition. I am copying this message to Helen Hayes and to Keir Starmer as Leader of the Opposition. You are living Britain wide open. You don’t face real conflicts with commandos or elite troops only.  It is said that Britain is less prepared today than Britain was prepared on the eve of World War Two.

When it comes to other issues, like the movement towards independence in Scotland, the wave of discontent in Scotland has something to do with Conservative policies in Scotland regarding defence. It was called the amalgamation of British regiments when regiments that were the pride and honour of Scotland and had a long record in history books were wiped out by Margaret Thatcher. Once, again, saving the penny and losing the pound and threatening to partition the United Kingdom. It was David Cameron that moved military contracts from Portsmouth to Scotland to try to push away the danger of a successful vote for independence in Scotland.

You are barely 50 years of age. You have no real memories of the process that led to rising votes in favour of Scottish independence. You have no real memories of the conflict in the South Atlantic and about the disadvantages that the British fleet faced in the South Atlantic. Do you know why British troops were killed before they ever set foot on the islands? Lack of air cover.

Helen Hayes might not be aware of it. I saw it when it happened. The Sir Galahad and other ships were easy prey of the Argentine Airforce because there was no air cover available. This brings memories of another military disaster that took place under a Conservative government. Have you about the history of the Royal Navy and the sinking of the Prince of Wales by the Japanese air force that used torpedo planes against British ships that went to war without air cover?

Have you read about what happened in Narvik, Norway? Are you aware of why it happened? It happened because British troops went to Norway without air cover and without artillery. They were attacked by the Wermacht from the sea, on land and from the air. This led to the downfall of Neville Chamberlain as Prime Minister. If anything happens in the South Atlantic or elsewhere that is remotely similar to what happened in Narvik, you will only have yourself to blame.

Don’t play with British lives. Don’t risk British lives by reducing British military capabilities.

 

Rebecca Sabben-Clare QC: knowledgeable or just negligent?

 

Rebecca Sabben-Clare QC: knowledgeable or just negligent

She took out a dangerous dog without a muzzle, lost control of the dog and the dog killed in Hammersmith, West London. In this case, the victim was a seal. It could have been a child. She didn't know how to handle a dangerous animal. As if this wasn't enough, she took legal action against mass media to prevent them broadcasting the sad news caused by her negligence.

Oxford Educated, but with very little common sense and complete disregard for public safety. 

The Independent: actively promoting civil disobedience

 

The Independent newspaper has been for quite a while a digital newspaper that often allows comments made by readers, but it has a very pecular moderation style allowing comments that actively promote civil disobedience and acts of aggression. Today, The Indepent reported that the British Prime Minister Boris Johnson had indicated that the national flag should be seen in all public buildings. The moderators of the Independent publicly allowed comments that implied that Britain is now National Socialist Germany and Boris Johnson is the equivalent of Adolf Hitler simply because he asked for British flags in public buildings, something that is the norm worldwide and nobody has been saying that the USA is National Socialist Germany because US flags appear on public buildings. 

The Independent allows comments of individuals that call Police officers in charge of enforcing legislation introduced for the common good to protect peoples' health 'bastards',. For several days, there have been disturbances in London and in other cities. In Bristol, Police officers were attacked, Police vehicles torched, Police buildings damaged and glass windows broken by individuals who have found a home on the pages of The Independent. 

The Independent, as well as other newspapers including Metro and Evening Standard and London Live - a television channel - are owned by a former KGB agent that also happens to be a Russian oligarch called Alexander Lebedev and his son Evgeny Lebedev. His son passes as a charitable man and socialite, but the tone of media he owns is decidedly anti-British. Paradoxically, the son of a former KGB agent was made a Member of the House of Lords.

Alexander Lebedev

 

Evgeny Lebedev

You can draw whichever conclussions you might draw about the state of Britain and of some British media. This is happening in the United Kingdom.

Harry Windsor's profile will surpass Diana's popularity and the popularity of the British Royal Family

 

Harry Windsor's popularity will rise exponentially leaving all others royals far behind, including Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

While other royals talk about it, Harry will be actually doing it and will be doing in plain view of the entire world as chief impact officer of an organisation that provides professional coaching, mental health advice and learning for personal development. 

The Prince has also signed multimillionary contracts providing content for Spotify and Netflix that automatically make him a household name both in the UK and overseas. 

This comes as a continuation of his role as founder of Invictus Games, an event for injured or sick army personnel by using sports as a factor for their psychological and physical recovery. The Prince also founded Sentebale, a charity that supports the mental health and wellbeing of young people affected by HIV in Africa.

For those talking about revamping the image of the Royal Family, the present royal dispute was a gigantic lost opportunity for an ailing Monarchy to shine once again.Silicon Valley tech firms have been the drivers of an international revolution that vastly surpasses the impact of old habitual pomp and circumstance.

The Royal Household has contracted the services of a private enterprise to deal with the issue of racism, but it has been left stranded behind an individual that is prone to go where no man has gone before. Prince Harry doesn't need to explain that he is no racist nor does he have to contract any private contractor to deal with the stigma of racism. No one can now say that he is leaving thanks to subsidies paid by the State. "Sorry folks, keep your monies. I will make my own monies."

In 1776, the American colonies declared themselves independent from the British Empire. In 2021, an heir of the British Crown has declared himself independent from the British Royal Family and is making his way from America towards the world.

 

  

 

2021 - London Assembly Elections Start of official election period and nominations

A year after the London Assembly Elections had to be posponed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and measures put in place to prevent the spread of the virus, London is open for business again and preparations are in full swing for what is going to be a very exciting time for all Londoners. 

From 9:00 o'clock this morning and with 45 days to go until election day on May 6th, London Elect is calling on all voters across London to prepare themselves to vote. Nominations can now be submitted for those wishing to stand for Mayor and the London Assembly. The nomination period will end at 16:00 hours on March 30th 2021. It must be noted that campaign spending will be controlled.

To register to vote, you can visit: gov.uk/register-to-vote

How to vote

• In this election, there are three ballot papers and four votes.
• Two votes for the Assembly elections and a first and second choice for the Mayoral election.
• You must make a first choice, or your vote won’t be counted. Each vote must be for a different candidate.
• Your polling station will be open from 7am until 10pm on election day. 
• Before 6 May, you will receive your polling card through your door. This will include details of your named polling station.
• You can also vote by post. You must apply for a postal vote by 5pm on 20 April 2021. 
• Your ballot papers will be sent to you about a week before Election Day. Mark your votes and return them to arrive before 10pm on 6 May 2021.
• You can also vote by proxy. This is when a person you trust votes for your chosen candidates on your behalf if you are unable to make it to the polling station. If you want a proxy vote, your council must receive your application by 5pm on 27 April 2021. The deadline to apply for a proxy vote as a result of an emergency is 5pm, Thursday 6 May 2021.

 To find out more, visit londonelects.org.uk

 

1. This unique form of local government represents the interests of London and Londoners.

London has one Mayor and 25 Assembly Members. The Mayor of London is responsible for running the city, from policing and housing to environment and transport.

The Assembly keeps a check on the Mayor’s work and investigates issues that matter to Londoners.

2. To find out more, visit: londonelects.org.uk
3. Link to 2016 results

LGBT and mainstream religions

The message by Pope Francis that the Catholic Church will not bless same sex marriages doesn't come as a surprise. In fact, it has been part of religious doctrine for many hundreds of years. The Anglican Church itself has been in trouble because several branches of the Protestant communion reject the liberal attitudes of the English branch with regards to women as priests and with regards to homosexuality.

In fact, the Bible is about Adam and Eve, not Jenny and Mary or Peter and John. It is assumed that God is male - Father - and the emphasis is on the biological duality of Man and Woman.

The Church doesn't ignore the fact that in the real world there are heterosexual people, bisexual people and homosexual people, apart from other categories that you can imagine like pansexual or asexual.

The Catholic Church is not about Evolution. It is about Creed. The fact remains that if you are going to join any club, it is assumed that you sign up to the principles, rules and regulations of the said club. LGBT Catholics is a contradiction in terms. Despite the fact that there is homosexuality within the Catholic Church (the Catholic Church cannot escape the realities of humanity), there is the understanding that whoever calls himsels a Catholic will live by the principles of Catholicism.

Having said that, you have the choice to maintain your life choices by joining other religious denominations that allow you to maintain your life choices. Therefore, the confrontation between those who want to promote LGBT messages and the Catholic Church is totally unnecessary. You can join another Church or Religion, you can practice your religion privately as your dialogue between you and God or you can do without any religion whatsoever.

What people do in private as part of consensual activities is their business as long as they don't violate laws and regulations established to protect vulnerable adults and children. The same goes for religion. You either believe or don't believe. You don't need Churches or religious organisations to believe. 

The LGBT movement is a political movement that is constantly trying to force the rest of society to live by what they stand for. This is where the problem arises. Other people are also entitled to live according to their own beliefs. If the Catholic Church chooses to stand for and to stick to their beliefs, so be it. You don't have to be a member of the Catholic Church. Nobody forces you to be or to become a member of the Catholic Church. Inquisitions should be a thing of the past. By seeking to impose a Forced Conversion of the Catholic Church, the LGBT movement is shooting itself in the foot. 

Individuals who seek to be respected regardless of gender differences or life choices should understand that trying to force the Catholic Church to accept something that the Catholic Church couldn't accept because it goes against the Creed violates freedom of choice. If you don't like the club, join another club or create a club of your own. 

Personally, I treat everybody fairly as individuals, regadless of gender or sexual orientation. I do not demonise people because of their gender or sexual orientation. Having said that, the Catholic Church has the legitimate right to stick to the Catholic Creed.

Yet again Electoral Fraud in Labour Constituencies

Not long ago, it happened in Tower Hamlets where instances of electoral fraud and voter intimidation were investigated, leading to the removal from his post of the then Mayor Lutfur Rahman who was found guilty of corrupt and illegal practices by an Election Court in 2015. 

Lutfur Rahman

 

It was found that votes for rival parties had been intentionally lost at the count and Mr Rahman was removed from office and banned from standing for election for five years. 

But in spite of very serious issues that proved that the election was rigged, in the following election no proof of identification was introduced. Irregularities also included ballot tampering and postal vote fraud.

Now, yet another scandal has shaken the Labour Party that led to the suspension of East Ham and West Ham constituency parties represented by Stephen Timms and Lyn Brown. 

Stephen Timms

Lyn Brown

Troubled years for the Labour Party that indicated that until further notice no party meetings or business can take place, but Labour Party authorities refused to divulge the nature of the investigation. The allegations of electoral malpractice are said to be wide ranging and supported by a considerable amount of evidence. 

In places like Newham, support for the Labour Party has been massive with practically all seats being occupied by Labour Party Councillors. The borough also has a Labour Party Mayor. How confident can we be that in the coming London Assembly elections voting will be legal? Three separate scandals in constituencies controlled by the Labour Party.

In a few days time, the House of Commons will consider a bill demanding electoral proof of identification for voters. I reckon that such piece of legislation is long overdue to tackle manipulatioon and fraud in elections. 

After the anti-Semitism scandal, the Islamophobia scandal, and several other scandals involving misconduct including sexual misconduct, racism, misuse of public monies, false statements of parliamentary expenses and political intimidation and bribes leading to the arrest of the Labour Mayor in Liverpool, the Labour Party should grasp the opportunity of supporting a piece of legislation aimed at ensuring that voting is legal and that those voting are legally entitled to vote.

It was pretty extraordinary to see a Labour Party MP walking inside the Houses of Parliament wearing a Police electronic tag attached to one of her legs because she lied and falsely accused an innocent person who was overseas of an offense that she herself committed. 

With all that has happened in recent years, the Labour Party can hardly claim that it occupies the high moral ground. 

Changing a leader is easy, but getting of a bad reputation based on corruption, undemocratic practices and examples of incompetence publicly displayed by members of the Labour Party Shadow Cabinet is not going to be easy.

 

Political Oppresion in the United Kingdom

In the United Kingdom, political oppression can take many forms, but it does exist. As usual, oppression is disguised as exclusion. If you have certain ideas, you can be excluded from the mass media, from the workplace, and could end up totally isolated being labeled as undesirable or extreme. You could be demonised with fabricated stories that repeated a thousand times are seen as revealed truth.

Oppresion via Exclusion is a strategy that has been perfected by Perfidious Albion and it exists practically in every place that matters in the United Kingdom.   

Harry and Meghan: How Royal Family advisers are destroying the Royal Family

 

When Diana died, Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II did not manage to read the public mood. Driven by tradition, she could not understand the new world that was open right in front of her. She had to be told to come out and grieve with the rest of the nation.

Not in a million years could the Royal Family have imagined or conceived the idea that Harry would end up marrying outside the circle of 'acceptability'. Every gesture, every word, every statement made about fairness and equality and open-ness were now going to be tested to the limit. 

In years past, the Royal Family faced a huge challenge when a King - Edward VIII, Prince of Wales - was told in no uncertain terms that he could not remain as King as long he wanted to marry an American divorcee. Decades later, Prince Charles, first heir to the Throne, married a divorcee after the catastrophic end of his marriage to Princess Diana. Had the trauma of Edward VIII's abdication been avoided, history would have been radically different not just for Britain, but also for Europe and the world as a whole.

To say that the Royal Family has been under close scrutiny is one of the biggest understatements of all times. The Royal Family is not just under scrutiny because of the Charles and Diana saga. The behaviour of Prince Andrew in terms of his personal life and of his commercial dealings involving National Security has not done the Royal Family any favours. The feud created by the way they have dealt with Harry and Meghan has extremely serious connotations. In the USA, the R word has already been mentioned and the question has already been uttered. Are Harry and Meghan being treated as they are being treated because Meghan is mixed race? The whole affair could have critical geopolitical repercussions i.e. the Commonwealth.

All the efforts made to market the Royal Family as modern, openminded, tolerant and well suited for the Britain of the Twenty-First Centurity look and feel now like a complete waste of time. The divide between the Royal Family and the new multicultural and multiracial Britain is growing wider and wider. In the struggle, Harry and Meghan have come to represent David while the Royal Family is unquestionably seen as Goliath.

Royal Advisers have tried to destroy Harry and Meghan. They went after their public image using public humiliation as a tool. There are accusations about bullying and most recently about improper use of the charity status. This will go on and on and at every step a new bit will be chopped away damaging the Royal Family and turning the Royal Family into a figure of hatred and public disgust. William will be made to represent the old and corrupt establishment with its privileges and veils of secrecy while Harry will be the Champion of ordinary people who stood on his two feet againt the tyranny imposed by the Establishment. Of the two brothers, Harry will be Diana's legitimate heir and we know whom public opinion will support.

 

 

Covid-19: Back to school, back to work, back to life

Since March 2020, Britain has been on downwards spiral because of its efforts to tackle a pandemic that started very far away from its shores. 

The United Kingdom has witnessed a new level of awareness concerning immigration. The open-doors policy, with little control of who comes in and who goes out, has killed more than a 100 thousand people in the United Kingdom. Thousands upon thousands of British families mourn a loss relatives. In some some families, several members perished.

As the flow of pretend refugees continues, many of them have been found to be infected with viruses that could literally killed them and those they come into contact with. 

For decades, Britain has cared and control the flow of dogs and cats with legal quarantines to prevent illnesses like rabies but, paradoxically, has allowed the free flow of people without the vitally required sanitary controls. Britain, like other countries, has paid a very high price for the policies supported by liberals and left-wingers. Open Doors? In your dreams. No more. From now on, everybody coming to the United Kingdom should be subjected to stringent sanitary controls to ensure that people living the United Kingdom are safe from pests brought in. Will stringent sanitary measures be implemented? Lets see. Very soon Liberals and Left-Wingers will say that stopping illnesses is 'a Human Rights violation'.

The one industry that has been extremely busy in recent months is the industry of funeral parlors and undertakers as more than 100,000 lives were lost to the pandemic brought into Britain from overseas.

Now that there are plans to go back to school, back to work and back to life, lets remember how such a pandemic was possible. It was possible thanks to the Open-Doors policies supported by Liberal and Left-Wingers.

  

We want Britain to become, once again, a buoyant and vibrant economy. We must never forget that the pile of deaths was brought to the United Kingdom by unsuitable immigration policies. Yes, dogs and cats can bring in illnesses, but every years millions of peoples were coming in or passing through British ports of entry without any crucial sanitary controls. 

The World After: Optimism versus Pessimism

We were on dire straits before Covid-19 came into the picture. We struggled to adapt to a new reality. Now, we have to pick up the pieces and return to some sort of normality. The forced 'gap year' might have caused more damage than it was initially thought that it would cause. For those who managed to keep their jobs, things were difficult. For those who didn't manage to keep their jobs, life has been a series of catastrophic events.

People have routines, routines that allowed to have a structure to keep themselves physically and mentally balanced. When those routines are wiped out and their disapparence comes together with worries about how they are going to be able to make a living, many people will feel that they are sinking into the abyss. 

The fact that many of us now spend most of the time inside our own homes is a crucial factor. We have a lot of time to think about what worries us. For me the solutation is to spend more and more time doing creative stuff, instead of sitting passively in front of a screen. Television is an addictive drug. If you free yourself from television and spend more time exercising your brain you will have a better chance of keeping your emotional balance. Fixing and making things inside and outside the home or reading books that you didn't have the time or the inclination to read and listening to music that you enjoy are usually recommended as therapy. Make those things that are usually recommeded as therapy an intrinsic part of your daily routine. 

I have got a life plan. As soon as weather allows and restrictions are easeed, I will go back to nature. Maybe a train journey to the coast to walk along the beach. Open spaces for open brains open to new ideas. It will be the time to catch up with real life.

Going back to the same old routines would be a complete waste of time. This is the time to do thing bigger and better. We owe it to ourselves and we must wait for other to deliver what we can do ourselves.