Is there a redrawing of the political world in the United Kingdom?

It is plainly visible that the Conservative Party and the Labour Party are no longer that they used to be. In many areas inside the United Kingdom, the two party system has literally collapsed. New political parties have arrived and others are being created because of the partition of existing political parties.

The Labour Party was created because of the Trade Union Movement and now the Labour Party is on a collision course with the Trade Union Movement.

A political migration movement is accelerating. Trying to accommodate a plurality of views, often contradictory, has lead to ambiguities and frustration and lack of trust in big political organisations and, perhaps, the day for Britain to abandon the two party system is long overdue, opening the door to coalitions of smaller parties that better reflect in Parliament the views of individual voters.

Demographics influences, more and more, political life in the United Kingdom, and this is happening especially because of geopolitical issues. In more than one way, the existence of coalitions instead of big political parties is a healthier option, limiting the power of lobbies.

From a geopolitical perspective, no political party on its own would be able to drive the country in a given direction, without the support of a bigger number of voters, thus preventing any military adventures or the start of conflicts based on false premises. There would be greater accountability.

In order to fund wars, the Labour Party is ready and willing to sacrifice the elderly and the disabled

 

The Labour government that started in July 2024 started what was presumed to be a period of austerity, but soon after elections in which the Reform Party won 10 out of 16 local authorities the tune changed. More than 10 billion Pound for Mauritious, an undefined amount of money for Volodomir Zelensky, the promise to buil 6 ammunition factories, to build 12 nuclear submarines, to acquire jets capable of launching nuclear weapons and the list goes on. 

Nor the British Prime Minister, or the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or any other member of the Cabinent has been willing to tell the British people where the money is going to come from.

Where is the money coming from? A new term has been coined. Following QE Quantitative Easing, now comes QT Quantitative Tightening. The Bank of England is selling expensive bonds of public debt for lower prices and the Treasury has promised to cover the losses of the Bank of England. So monies that could have been used to finance better living standards. So, not enough money for disabled people, no money for schools, no money for the health service that the Labour Party has classified as "a wasteful NHS". 

Tomorrow´s decision in Parliament is very much linked to so called QT. We do not know what is going behind close doors, but we do know the Electorate´s reaction. Both Labour and Conservatives were massacred in the polling stations during the 2025 elections and 2026 could be an even more disastrous defeat for both Labour and Conservative.

Business activity in the United Kingdom has gone down 40% and there is a list of food chains closing branches across the country, as the number of cases of shoplifting goes up steadily. More taxes? More borrowing?

Kier Starmer is very much willing to increase the blackhole ten times over or more

 

The expression "it does not add up" exists for a reason. So what we are being told clases with reality then you have to say that "it does not add up".

For months and even today in Prime Minister Question Time, Keir Starmer kept repeating the mantra about the 22 billion blackhole generated by the previous Conservative Administration.

Now, you look at the shopping list presented in the last few days and you realize that the numbers Keir Starmer is dealing with "do not add aup". More than 10 billion for Mauritius. More than 5 billion for Ukraine - in fact we have lost the count of all the monies sent to Ukraine and this includes also equipment for military use. About 22 billion Pound for a project promoted by Ed Milliband regarding the environment (not mentioning planning application changes that will allow developers to wipe out entire greenbelt areas) But the list of investments promised goes on and on. But not a word in terms of where the monies for those investments are coming from.

Keir Starmer keeps saying that Conservative criticism is unwarranted, and especially one specific benefit like the Winter Allowance that is less than peanuts compared to all other promises made by the Labour governement including nationalisation of railways services (not just the network, but also the trains that deliver such services) and the possible nationalisation of utility companies like Thames Water, a giant that is in financial troubles).

It is difficult to follow the Prime Minister and-or other members of the Cabinet that go around promised this, that and the other thing. Prime Minister, where is the money coming from?

John Healey came with announcements about the creation of 6 ammunition factories and the building of 12 nuclear submarines, the production of tens of thousands of drones promised to Ukraine, and much more.

Then we went the news that Helen Hayes MP is due to contact Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner to ask for a financial plan to support struggling local authorities. Once again, where will the money come from if money is being sent left, right, up and down in every possible direction. Just cancelling the Winter Allowance and cutting benefits for the disabled and the unemployed will not do the trick. We are talking about hundreds of billions of Pound and especially after the news that NATO does not 3% investment in defense, but 3.5% investment in defense.

With every passing day, the Labour government keeps adding items to the shopping list and as Paul Samuelson, the American Economist, put it, it is either butter or cannons. Whatever you investing in one thing is the monies that you have to reduce somewhere else. We have not even reached the Autum Budget.

Once again the Secretary for Defense John Healey MP promised to increase tenfold the number of drones sent to Ukraine. The cost of building and sending those drones, will it come from the monies said to be invested in improving Britain´s state of readiness for war?

Are you an accountant or somebody that has some expertise in auditing accounts? Would you like to audit the Labour government´s accounts? I am sure that it could be an experience that you could not possibly ever forget. Has Rachel Reeves something to say about all the promises made? I am sure that Rachel Reeves herself is rather stressed up. Imagine having to change the books every time the Prime Minister or other Members of the Cabinet make promises that force you to recalculate the way you plan to run finances. From the time you get to bed until the time you get up, everything will have changed. I am sure that when she wakes up in the morning, she does not experience nice feelings. It is much more like a nightmare.

Now, Sue Grey, the woman chosen by Keir Starmer to be Chief of Staff, did not last long. She resigned and went as fast as she had come in. Well, if you are an intelligent and clever operator, you can see from a mile how things are going to be, and it has been a nightmare. And the nightmare is just beginning. 

John Healey: if the money to support serving military personnel and their families was available, why no support was given until Reform appeared to be winning elections?

 

John Healey: if the money to support serving military personnel and their families was available, why no support was given until Reform appeared to be winning elections?

It is significative important to remark that just a few weeks ago there was massive austerity to the point the winter allowances for pensioners and welfare benefits were being cut, Now, after Reform won against Conservative and againts Labour, suddenly, out of the blue, there is money for everything.

So Rachel Reeves is willing to throw everything out of the Treasury to prevent Reform for winning elections. Sixteen times the Prime Minister mentioned Nigel Farage in a recent political gathering. Nigel Farage stated that he was happy to be living in the Prime Minister´s mind for free without having to pay rent.

Trust? What Trust? We have got a government that is willing to ruin Britain to keep itself in power. So, apparently, there was a budget gap left by the Conservatives. Well, a lot more than that has been spent or promised. More than 10 billion Pound for Mauritius, a very similar amount for Ukraine, 22 billion Pound for Ed Milliband Eco Projects, and now the promiss made by the Secretary for Defense that Britisn expenditure will rise exponentially to pay for defense? Where is the money coming from? From the 22 billion budget gap that Labour said that the Conservatives left behind. Ah, lets not forget billions of Pound promised for transport projects. 

Are you buying British debt bonds? Are you lending money to the British government? Are you afraid? I reckon you should be extremely afraid. One thing is to have to rescue the financial system. Another thing is to have enough money to rescue Britain which, as we know, would be something impossible to do given the size of the British economy.

UK Politics: Electoral Results seem to trump caution

Rachel Reeves seemed to symbolize levels of caution that from July 2024 led many to believe that Old Labour was gone. Labour sought to impose levels of autority that made many Labour Party supporters to question their allegiance to the Labour Party.

In a recent parliamentary election in Runcorn, neither the Labour Party Leader and Prime Minister Keir Starmer nor the Conservative Party Leader bothered to shop up during campaigning. The outcome was a lost by-elecition in which Reform won the day with a less than 10 votes difference.

But at lot worse has happened since then. In a rush to reach financial agreements with foreign countries, Labour has effectively given up British sovereignty and even the future of British workerss and British companies by offering absolutely unfair advantanges to Britain´s competitors.

In this most recent appearance, Keir Starmer mentioned the leader of the Reform Party not once but once every minute. No mention of the official Oppositon Leader Kemi Badenoch that has been reported absent.

Undoubtedly, this is fight for survival, but it feels like pushing an entire Army without weapons towards the frontline. Caution has been thrown to the wind. All the talk about financial control has been lost and Britain is bleeding money. Money for foreign countries for dubious deals and money to buy its way out of electoral disaster. Maybe the new Labour Party promises should be limited by the Electoral Commission because Labour´s announcements in terms of using public monies sound more and more like political campaigning and not as the actions of responsible government.

UK: the most important issue by far is immigration and this is Reform vs Conservative

 

The biggest issue by far in UK politics is immigration

This is a contest between the Reform Party and the Conservative Party

Non since 1997 had the Conservative Party suffered such a catastrophic series of electoral defeats in the United Kingdom. In July 2024, the unthinkable happened and the Labour Party cruised to power after 14 years of a Conservative Party Administration (or should be talk about several Conservative Governments). The fact is that the infighting within the Conservative Party led to several leadership contests and coming and goings in terms of economic policies. Voters lost confidence on a visibly confused and divided Conservative Party to the point that in the last leadership election the new leader was not chosen by a majority of members of the Conservative Party, but merely by Members of Parliament.

The outcome of 2024 was a complete disaster for the Conservative Party that saw its representation in the House of Commons reduced to a few more than a 100 Members of Parliament. The situation did not improve after a series of by-elections caused by personal scandals. This years the Conservative Party was campaigned to maintain control of not less than 16 local authorities. It lost them all.

Internal problems in the Conservative Party have not gone away. In fact, they are exacerbated by the fact that high profile Conservative MPs distance themselves from what is now the main core of what is left of the Conservative Party. Big vote winners of the Conserevative Party have fallen into disrepute. There is no unity and there is still the same level of confusion, aggravated by the fact that many of the issues they are now talking about are issues that they should have dealt with during 14 years of a Conservative Party administration.

So, when it comes to confronting the Reforma Party the question arises. "Why you did not do before what you now tell us that you want to do now? "It is a disarming question. The Conservative Party had a majority in Parliament and did not do what it now promises that it will do when it is stuck in Opposition.

A Conservative Party in Opposition cannot deliver any promises. Therefore many Conservative voters are now supporting the Reform Party and there is confusion about what the Reform Party stands for. Many voters do not have the time nor the inclination to focus on several issues at the same time. They now choose to focus their attention on one particular issue: Immigration. Immigration includes both illegal migration and legal migration. People care about illegal migration precisely because it is illegal and people care about legal migration because legal migration levels are much too high. 

Even the leader of the Labour Party that has always been in favour of mass migration made a statement declaring that new legislation was on the way to curb legal migration.

The more the Conservative Party attacks the Reform Party the more voters feel inclined to support the Reform Party. Why? Because in the Reform Party there is clarity of purpose about an issue most people care about. At this point in time, in certain areas, the Reform Party is winning against both Labour and Conservative. In other areas, the Labour Party has to fear the advances of the Green Party. If the Green Party manages to replace Labour in many areas and if the retreating Conservatives turn out to support the Reform Party then the chances of success of the Reform Party are vastly improved.

Next year, once again, there are local elections and all 32 local authorities in Greater London will be contested. Whatever the Labour government has done since July 2024 and whatever the Labour government will do until May 2026 will have an impact. Unfulfilled promises and discontent about policies implemented will play a very important role at local level. It could be said that the Greater London Elections will be the starting point of the campaign for the 2028 London Assembly Elections and soon after that there is going to be another General Election in 2029. There is an electoral progression that, for the moment, does not favour Labour or Conservative. The Reform Party and the Green Party stand to benefit at every level. 

Since the Liberal Party - now known as Liberal Democratic Party - was relegated to third place, there has never been anything so trascendental in British Politics. The Conservative Party has reigned supreme during most of the history of Parliamentary Democracy in the United Kingdom. The thought that the Conservative Party could be relegated to third or fourth place in the first quarter of the Twenty-First Century speaks volumes about the political challenges Britain is facing.

UK Elections: Not since the days when Labour replaced Liberal Party as the other party has anything similar happened in Elections

In a Parliamentary By-Election fought due to the resignation of a Labour MP, the Labour Party in government lost a seat to Reform Party, a newly formed political party led by Nigel Farage MP who became Member of Parliament in July 2024. But not only that. In local elections, the Reform Party managed to win control of 10 Local Councils and turned the remaining Local Authorities to No Overall Control. Massive losses for both the Conservative Party in Opposition and for the Labour Party in government.

As reported by the BBC, the number of seats allocated to each political party, of the 1637 seats being up for election, was as follows:

Her Majesty´s Opposition, the Conservative Party, lost 674 seats. Her Majesty´s Government, the Labour Party, managed to retain barely 98 seats. The main issue is this elections was Immigration, although lack of trust and opposition to policies implemented since July 2024 played a very important role. To sum up, neither of the two main parties - Conservative Party and Labour Party inspire trust. There are conflicts within both major political parties. Keir Starmer, as Prime Minister and Labour Party Leader is facing increasing rejection from his own party. Kemi Badenoch, as newly elected leader of the Conservative Party, has not managed to make voters forget about 14 years of a Conservative Party that saw a succession of party leaders and Prime Ministers, due to internal upheaval. From Theresa May, Boris Johnson, Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak to Kemi Badenoch, the Conservative Party had to go through an election in which it was left with little more than 100 MPs, many of which do not see eye to eye. The local elections and Mayoral Elections and a Parliamentary By-Election were supposed to be litmus test for both major political parties.

There might be soon yet another Parliamentary By Election due to troubles affecting the Labour Party in Government. The Labour Party still holds a majority of more than 400 Members of Parliament but due to internal disagreement regarding policies being implemented by the Labour Cabinet, 2025 is bound to be a critical year. Industrial unrest could be on the cards, affecting the Civil Service, the National Health Service and Education. If Labour supporters choose to vote for other political parties - i.e. in a by-Election in Lambeth, Labour voters decided to support the Green Party that got a handsome majority with 48%, leaving the Labour Party in second place with 39% - or to abstein then the leadership of Keir Starmer will be increasingly challenged. The fundamental question to ask is "If there was a General Eleciton, would the Labour Party lose the General Election?"  

Wednesday, October 30th, 2024 - Budget Day

 

This is personal, stated the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves. She refers to realities of the 1980s and 1990s. The Chancellor's efforts to gather capital will drag hundreds of thousands more people into paying tax and even more into higher rates as their pay rises, indicates none other than The Guardian.

Could a personal crusade turn into a nightmare? Changing fiscal rules to disguise debt making it appear as something else does not change the fact that it will still be borrowing. So more taxes and more borrowing that will be increased for public interest, according to the Chancellor.

Ordinary folk and many business were badly hit by the Covid Pandemic and the measures implemented to deal with the Covid Pandemic. After that, people and many business were hit by the energy crise generated by the conflict in Ukraine and the measures adopted against the Russian Federation. 

Now, they stand to be hit again by taxation and potentially higher prices of utilities, housing and daily shopping.

But the Chancellor of the Exchequer still says that she will implement the budget in a way that she will 'protect the living standards of working people'. 

Well, in an interview made in Washington, USA, Rachel Reeves - perhaps inadvertently - made promises that she will have to deliver. If she does not deliver and if the measures implemented by the Labour government become a de facto nightmare, then this will create a widely open door for another Conservative government.

Starting on Wednesday, October 30th, 2024, the government will have to deliver and with every failure, and every new crise, there will be many by-elections along the way in which people will express their discontent.

She talks about building schools and hospitals. Well, what will she do about nurses salaries that are not enough to rent a one bedroom flat? If living costs keep rising, this will be a de facto devaluation of salaries and a worsening of living standards. Before she goes around building schools and hospitals, she will have to look carefully at salaries actually paid to teachers and NHS staff. 

Even with the triple lock, state pensions are not enough to rent a one bedroom flat. State pensions are totally insufficient. Taxing state pensions and private pensions can only worsen an already bad situation. And this is going to do nothing to 'protect living standards'.  

Taxing private pensions, assets and shares? More madness on the way.

 Due to low productivity, Britain has increasingly relied on financial services. There are two sides of banking. One is the conventional side of banking based on mortgages and loans and the other is financial banking, lending money to investors that take a huge deal of risk and therefore expect higher rewards. 

Private pension funds very much depend on shares and investments and values fluctuate on a daily basis, so there is an inherent level of risk. How can you tax shares? Will you tax what a share was worth on Monday or what a share was worth on Tuesday?

Imagine yourself as a Northern Rock shareholder. One day you count your wins. You have an investment and you have a return. The next day, your investment evaporates because the value of your shares is literally zero and you have no return. Are we going to see debt taxed?

The only growth that the present Labour government will produce is the growth of debt, unemployment, illegal employment, and fraud. Launching a virulent attack against the one sector that keeps Britain alive is cutting down the tree on which you are standing. The 2008 financial crise will feel like a pleasant vacation.

The infamous event affecting people who had used their assets to support insurance payments comes to mind. One day they were riding the waves of opulence and the next day they were selling everything they had to pay for insurance claims.

What would happen if an Islamic political party was created?

 

What would happen to British politics if an Islamic political party was created? 

Looking at demographics, it is easy to imagine that if Muslim communities stopped supporting existing political parties and decided to create an Islamic Party such political party would be very successful. Muslim families tend to have more children and therefore, every year, the number of those supporting the said party electorally would be increasing. Nowadays, a sizeable number of those coming to Britain as refugees come from Muslim countries and with European countries increasingle averse to accept Muslim refugees the numbers of those coming to UK would also be growing up.

If Jeremy Corbyn wanted to increase his political influence, he is making all the right moves. Those he is now joining as a group happen to be mostly former Labour candidates and former Labour members now acting as Independents that happen to be Muslim. As the Conservative Party did before, Labour is alienating Muslim voters. More conservative Muslim voters not only oppose the mainstream political parties' policies and attitudes regarding Israel. They also oppose sexual ideology that openly contradicts traditional Muslim values.

In 2008, Britain faced a gigantic crise and billions were 'invested' to save the financial sector

Native Americans have an expression: keeping an ear on the ground. This literally means keeping an year on the ground to hear galloping horses. Looking at the pages of The Guardian and at postings on Internet from well known Labour Party operators it is easy to see that all is not well on Planet Starmer.

No more taxes and no more Austerity? North of the border, in Scotland, the SNP has been collecting taxes by imposing taxes on property transactions. South of the border, in England, the Labour Party is planning to charge taxes on property transacttions. This means that property owners are going to get a lot less than they now get for selling their properties.

If a property is worth 1000 and property transactions are for 1000, then the selling amount minus the cost of the ititial acquisition will be taxed 40%. Sellers will have to recoup the 40% the government is planning to take away. Selling prices will rise or sales will come to a hault altogether.

If the idea is to lower the cost of housing, imposing a tax on transactions will push prices up or will stop sales thus compromising, once again, the financial sector. We know that the properties market is what keeps the British economy afloat. Paralizing the properties market will send the British economy in a downwards spiral.

If the financial sector is compromised, the state cannot rescue the financial sector and it would be meaningless to try to rescue the financial sector if the rules that promove the crise are not changed. 

So Keir Starmer stated that he is out to fight against what he calls 'far right extremists'. In fact, a gigantic financial crise will do exactly the opposite. 

Alexander Gauland, from Alternative für Deutschland wrote: Wie schlimm kann es Deutschland gehen? Wie viel können wir provozieren? Es sei demnach im Interesse der Partei, dass noch mehr Migranten nach Deutschland kommen, denn gann gehe es der AfD wesser. 

What applies to immigration in Germany, applies to financial crise in the United Kingdom. If in less than a year the Labour Party bankrupts the British economy, the malaise generated by a financial crise will motivate people to move in the opposite direction and support so called right wing policies. 

Since the act passed by David Cameron and Nick Clegg regarding fixed terms is no more, it is more than likely that Labour MPs will start moving against Keir Starmer and if Keir Starmer were to introduce rules that only allow MPs to select Prime Ministerial Candidates and prevent Labour Party members from voting then Keir Starmer will have yet another crise to contend with.

Let us remember that thanks to Jeremy Corbyn and many other MPs that either left the Labour Party or were thrown out of the Labour Party membership grew exponentially. Getting rid of voting rights for members could send Labour Party membership numbers downwards.

The situation will then be critical for both the Labour Party and the 'middle-ground Conservatives' and will be a net benefit for those to the left of the Labour Party and for those to the right of the Conservative Party. With meltdown in the middle, the extremes will gain millions of supporters.

Wednesday, July 17th 2024 - State Opening of British Parliament

 

On Wednesday, July 17th, 2024, a new era in British politics begins with the official Opening of Parliament in the United Kingdom. 

A new Prime Minister with a massive number of MPs to back him up - 412 - faces a completely different environment. Conservatives down and Liberal Democrats with a massive increase of seats. 

The State Opening of Parliament takes place in the House of Lords with the reading of a full package of policies and iniatiatives that the new administration intends to implement from now until the next General Election, supposedly due in 2029. And there is another ingredient in the new Parliament which is the presence of a new player - Reform - with Nigel Farage and Richard Tice at the helm. This should increase the pressure on the new government - pressure that has been perhaps temporarily reduced by a massively reduce presence of Conservative MPs.

But nothing should be taken for granted. As a political commentator stated, big majorities in Parliament can also be a huge nightmare for the man on the chair as Prime Minister. The fact that the Conservative Party has still to name a Leader after the resignation of Rishi Sunak MP, might provide some relief to the new Labour Administration.

And what about the process to choose a new Conservative Party Leader. Despite calls for MPs not to engage in blood letting exercises, the strength of feelings and strong personalities in the Conservative Party, and given the fact that non elected and non-reelected politicians will have a strong influence in the decision making process, could lead precisely to a fight without quarters. 

Labour's 1997 historic majority led to Afghanistan and Iraq, but a war in Europe is a different cup of tea

 

Tony Blair / Prime Minister

Labour's historic majority in 1997 led straight to war in Afghanistan and in Iraq. Years later, we face the prospect of yet another war - although much more catastrophic if it ever happens.

In one of his initial appearances, Keir Starmer told the country and the world that he will allow the use of British weapons to attack the Russian Federation.

No interpretation needed. It is all too clear in which direction the wind is blowing.

And this is the same Labour Leader that opposed National Service. When conscription letters arrive telling young untrained men and women that they have to fight a war, I wonder what the public response will be.

Be assured that Keir Starmer will have no hesitation in terms of sending untrained British citizens to war, because reality tells that the British Armed Forces have been severely weaknened and do not have the manpower nor the equipment for any long term war.

It is not secret that Britain as well as other NATO countries expect that the USA will send young Americans to the slaughter house to defend European countries that have been entirely negligent when it comes to compliance of NATO Article 3 that demands that each member has to be able to defend itself.

Britain has done very little to beef up its Armed Forces. In fact, the now former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps could hardly explain why what he called an increase in defense expenditure was what actually a reduction in real terms. He couldn't because it was a reduction.

British morale is at an all time low affecting recruitment. Reports about more than 64% of those serving members of the Armed Forces living in substandard accommodation do not help. Let's see what Keir Starmer has to say about beefing up the Armed Forces because if he does not pay attention to the Armed Forces then we will know that all the rhetoric is based on thin air. 

British Conservatives: No leader? Until when?

 

Now former British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is also former Conservative Party Leader.

Some say that the General Election was premature, but the manner of his resignation as Party Leader was certainly premature.

Next week when elected MPs assemble in the House of Commons to choose the next Speaker of the House of Commons, the Conservative Party will be headless.

Despite comments made by David Cameron and George Osborne about delays the election of the next Conservative Party Leader, it is self-evident that the Conservative Party cannot be leaderless for long. Who is going to face Keir Starmer as Shadow Prime Minister? Who is going to give the Conservative Party a sense of direction?

In debating chamber of the House of Commons will be three powerful figures: Nigel Farage, Richard Tice and Lee Anderson that speaking for Reform and the door is open for more disertions from the Conservative Party if no one stands to lead the Conservative Party. We are dealing with the survival of the Conservative Party. 

So, any delay can only increase present dangers for the Conservative Party. Those who were on the brink of leaving the Conservative Party before the General Election could be tempted to join Reform or other political forces if the issue of leadership is not resolved.

In the selection process that led to his appointment as Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak lost to Liz Truss because party members voted mostly for Liz Truss. When Liz Truss was forced to resign, then Rishi Sunak was chosen but only by Conservative MPs without the support of Conservative Party members.

Therefore, the question is absolutely relevant. Who is going to choose the next Conservative Party Leader? Will Conservative Party Members be given the chance to vote or will the next Conservative Party Leader be chosen by Conservative Party MPs?

The Truth shall set you free: You cannot promise salary increases and all kinds of improvements without putting up taxes, borrowing or both borrowing and putting up taxes

 

As July 4th 2024 approaches, both of the main contenders in the UK General Election are promising cakes and promising that you can eat your cake, and that you will have the same cake after eating it. They will have to put up taxes and borrow ever more and most probably print monies in what has been known as 'quantitative easing'. 

The Unions are already making noises and saying that they will request that promises made by Shadow Chancellor Rachel Reeves are delivered. She has already spoken about salary increases in the public sector and this includes the most fundamental services like the NHS, the biggest employer in Europe and possibly the biggest employer in the world.

July 4th, 2024 happens to be Independence Day in the USA, but in Britain it might become Dependence Day if prices get out of control and people end up seeing the buying power of their income reduced. The Covid Pandemic and the energy crise generated by geopolitical decisions kicked in inflation and force the Bank of England to put up interest rates, but in spite of interest rate rises prices paid for basic items of the family basket are high and rising. How much people need to earn to have a roof over their heads? How much do they need to earn to feed themselves properly?

Funny to see on the pages of The Guardian comments about working families and pensioners as if they were part of different species. The reality is that more and more people already retired are returning to work to make ends meet and therefore they are part of working families. Most people could not possibly survive if their sole income was a pension.

On the nature of war: if somebody risks his or her life for the country you see as your country, he or she are duly entitled to be protected by you.

In 2001, Britain went into Afghanistan and stayed there 20 years. In order to fight in Afghanistan, British forces needed the cooperation of local populations, people that put themseves in mortal danger simply because they were helping Britain to fight a war. In Britain's hour of need, they were there to support Britain and therefore Britain has the moral obligation to protect them in their hour of need.

In 2003, Britain went into Iraq and needed the cooperation of Iraqis to be there. There same applies then to Iraqis that helped Britain and it must be remembered that many of them not just risked their lives. They lost their lives.

When the point was raised that Britain should honour those who fought for Britain during World Wars, including World War Two, some Conservative MPs showed that they opposed the plan not because of what happened in World War Two and other wars of a long gone past but because of present geopolitical considerations that have nothing to do with the risks people took 70 or so years ago. If we were to think in such a way, Britain would see the French Resistance as enemies because of the fight against Napoleon.

Sajid Javid and others are right to consider honouring Muslim fighters that fought for Britain during World War Two. 

 

Immigration Changes: changing national legislation and adherence to international treaties?

 

Changing national legislation and adherence to international treaties?

Statements have been made: legislation is going to be changed to allow Britain to overcome legal obstacles to deal with migration.

After the judgement issued by the Supreme Court regarding government agreements with Rwanda about migration management, questions have been raised in terms of how the British government is going to manage to overcome legal obstacles.

We await the texts of new bills that will have to be produced by Parliament to achieve declared aims so that the idea of sending migrants to Rwanda does not become a kind of round trip with people sent to Rwanda being returned by Rwanda to the United Kingdom in order to comply with legislation.

Declaring that Rwanda is a safe country might not be nearly enough if for any reason Rwanda decides to deport migrants back to the United Kingdom. What would be the point of accepting migrants back in Britain? Is this yet another plan destined to fail?

Can anybody come up with a viable plan, instead of proposing yet another gimmick?

In past months, hotels and recreational facilities have been filled up with illegal migrants. Even a barge was acquired to accommodate illegal migrants. Monies were paid to Rwanda for a plan that the Supreme Court declared illegal.

Another political embarrassment? We await with impatience the text of legislation promised by the government that will have to deal with the issue of illegal migration effectively.  

Failure to deliver in this particular scenario when the Prime Minister and Cabinet members have committed themselves so publicly is political suicide.

 

Rishi Sunak: Whatever it takes, we are going to deliver

 

Today, I saw Rishi Sunak acting Prime Ministerial. We are going to deliver whatever it takes

Firstly, he was respectful and accepted the verdict of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court acted within its remit according to existing legislation and international agreements.

But then he rose as Prime Minister and stated loud and clear that he would put through Parliament legislation to ensure that Britain can protect its borders and protect national interests. Basically, he stated that the country must never give up its sovereignty.

James Cleverly as a former Foreign Secretary and new Home Secretary stated that the boats will be stopped and the new Foreign Secretary and former Prime Minister David Cameron was there to emphasize exactly the same message. Michael Howard, former Party Leader, was also fast to support the Prime Minister and his determination to deliver regarding one of the hottest issues of the political agenda.

It is almost as if events of recent days and months have generated a transformation. Preventing Illegal migration might become the defining moment of a new Conservative Administration. This is the ultimate test of his political career. Defeat is not an option. He must deliver.

Conservative Party: 40,000 teachers left the profession. NHS is bleeding professionals that are leaving even for other countries

Conservative Party is in a crisis with MPs no longer willing to stand for re-election and even members of the Cabinet announcing that they will not be standing for re-election. In the meantime, problems are being piled up at all levels. 

In education, more than 40,000 teachers are no longer teaching. They have had more than enough. When asked, a school teacher said 'I could not take it any more. It was not just about 35 pupils in the classroom. It was also about dealing with children with mental health issues that made teaching impossible.' It is not about remuneration. It is about working conditions. Teacher are supposed to teach. They are not supposed to deal with psychiatric problems thrown in the classroom.

What has changed about the operation of Police stations in the UK. Politicians including Prime Minister Rishi Sunak make promises in the House of Commons that he really and truly knows that cannot be delivered. Police stations are not even receiving reports regarding property stolen, let alone theft of mobile phones. They are understaff and they don't have the resources to deal with that kind of crime.

How much times does a consultant in the NHS have to deal with patients? Not much. There are not enough consultants and not enough specialised staff. There is so much that can be done with lack of human resources and with lack of equipment.

And what happens in Job Centres? Unqualified staff and insufficient staff are leading to DWP staff quitting their jobs because they cannot deal with the workload they are forced to deal with. 

And what happens at the Home Office? Not enough staff to deal with mountains of applications and the natural consequence is that everything gets delayed and this has social consequences. A rising number of people are wandering around in limbo and more often than not local authorities, schools and social services have to deal with the outcome having to find non existing accommodation for families with children, many of which are facing mental health problems and situations of abuse including domestic violence.

This is a tale of massive government incompetence. Government secretaries of state and ministers spend an awful amount of time making political statements and seem absolutely oblivious to reality. What is the point of spending millions of Pound every ten years to carry out Censuses? Save the money spent on Censuses and spend it to really try to solve the myriad of problems Britain is facing. Whatever data can be gathered in censuses are completely unreliable.

You will never be able to keep up with inflation when trying to support families via the welfare state. Look at the cost of buying and look at the cost of renting. Private renting is a total waste of resources. The private market is not supposed to meet the needs of those in need. Private letting is a business. What is needed is the sort of letting that can be controlled by the state. If you have social housing, the monies can be kept by the state and re-invested in social services. Private renting should be left for those who can afford to rent without state support. The state should be both landlord and service provider.

Do you know what happens to families with children that are forced to be constantly on the move from one area to another, from one city to another? Do you know what happens when it comes to education, health, work, family cohesion and mental health? Instability, uncertainty, mental health problems, domestic violence, constant financial struggle and dependency and the list goes on.

 

 

The Money Bubble: Why politicians are completely out of touch with peoples' everyday realities

When peoples are more familiar with spreadsheets that they are familiar with ordinary people bad things happen. Look around the cabinet. What do you see? They don't have a clue about what it takes to live the life of ordinary individuals that always have be chasing rabbits, always living with the uncertainty of being able or not being able to pay bills.

Because they are totally out of touch with realities of John Smith and Mrs Smith they go around talking about policies that are good for posturing and self-adulation instead of getting to grip with the real needs of those they supposedly stand to represent. By elections will be lost, local elections will be lost and ultimately a General Election will be lost. If you trully believe that falling into desperate situations and having to live on the streets is a 'lifestyle choice' then nothing else needs to be said about how out of touch you are.

Housing lists for social accommodation get longer and longer, the cost of rented accommodation is beyond most peoples' means as are unaffordable mortgages. Then you decide to throw people a few bones to supposedly allow them to cope with rising utility bills and consider that by doing so you are some kind of Robin Hood. No wonder qualified and newly qualified teachers are leaving the profession. They are supposed to be employed to teach and end up having to cope with worsening social situations in the classroom.

I can't wait to see a new General Election. I want everybody to get in touch with reality. As I have stated in many articles, I keep asking about the Dream. What is the Dream? All we get is procrastination, posturing, self-adulation and false promises.

Coming to the issue of migration and processing of applications, is there a backlog when dealing with applications that leads to all kind of irregularities? Don't have enough staff working at the Home Office? What are you waiting for? When will you employ enough staff to deal with the backlog when things get worse and worse? If you don't have the will to do what needs to be done, step aside and allow somebody else to do it.