If Putin were a woman s/he would never have put up with the NATO/EU land grabs

If Boris Johnson thinks that if Putin were a woman s/he would not have invaded Ukraine he knows very little about women.

No woman would have been so restrained and patient as Vladimir Putin has been while watching the EU and NATO pushing ever closer to the borders of Russia.

A woman would have been over the borders and tackled the NATO/EU land grabs head on years ago. There would have been no pussy footing about. No hesitation.

And that, Boris, is why women should not be heads of state.

People voting with their feet are giving France and the EU a message they can’t ignore

Ex French colonies are joining the Commonwealth at the same time as migrants and asylum seekers are fleeing the claimed safety of France and the EU,desperate to get to the UK.

France and the EU can laugh at the beleaguered UK trying to stem the flow, but they really need to ask themselves why it is that so many wish to leave their orbit and choose to risk all to get to the UK or to abandon their historical connections with France to join the Commonwealth.

We would never have heard the end of it if the flow had been in the opposite direction!

The Tory government’s war on property owners continues

Once upon a time in a land called England people could own property and because they held their own deeds no-one could take it away from them.

Bit by bit successive governments have removed different aspects of property rights, especially those relating to the ability to rent out property and take it back if the tenant misbehaves.

When the government or local authorities wanted a piece of land or a house they could issue a compulsory purchase order and were duty bound to pay the going rate to the owner.

Now the government plans to change that duty. if your land is wanted for housing but is currently just a scrubby field on the edge of town you might be pleased and expect a windfall payment.

No such luck in future. The windfall will go to the council and all you will get is the loss of your land and the value of a scrubby field.

Not fair? True. But then that is the sort of Socialism the current Tory government espouses. Get the real Socialists or Greens in power and it will get a whole lot worse.

US Supreme Court declares US devolution – not the end of the free world

The Supreme Court judgement overturning Roe v. Wade has been treated as the end of women’s rights and the free world as those who support the growth of One Government to Rule Them All see their carefully accrued powers slipping away.

To be clear, the SC has NOT made abortion illegal. It has NOT “gutted abortion rights”. What it has done is state that the constitution prevents central government from interfering in decision making that belongs to the individual states. The whole point of the US constitution is to control the instinct of central government to leech power to itself and this Judgement returns powers that were wrongly abrogated back to the states.

In effect the SC has declared a reinstatement of the US version of devolution. It has given the states the right to decide what their population wants via the ballot box. What could be fairer than that?

Housing problems won’t go away until government leaves it alone

The recent announcements that benefit claimants would be allowed to put their benefit income towards mortgages in England and that the right to buy would be extended to housing association tenants has resulted in claims that this will lead to more homelessness and a lack of properties available for renters.

In reality it doesn’t matter if the occupier of a home rents it or owns it. He still occupies it and so that home is unavailable to anyone else. It might be politically useful for opponents of the government to claim that the change from renter to owner reduces the housing stock in the country but such arguments will not sway voters who can see through the rhetoric.

All that these policies will achieve is to change some lucky renters to owners, providing they can afford to service their loans with rapidly rising inflation that could lead to mortgage interest hikes. It will not increase the housing stock by one single property.

So what is to be done?

First and foremost it is obvious that neither housing stock nor infrastructure can keep up with the influx of immigrants, both legal and illegal, flowing into the country. The problem to overcome is the massed campaign groups demanding ever open borders and taking legal action to try and prevent any attempt to decrease the inwards flow.

The campaigners seem unable to understand that they are acting as hoarders of people, taking in more and more until not only can the country not provide for the incomers, its own people start to see their quality of life downgraded. The NHS not coping. Schools and roads overcrowded. And of course, a housing shortage.

The obvious solution, if we can not stop or slow the ever increasing influx of people, would be to build more homes along with the necessary infrastructure, however, those who most need the homes simply can’t afford to either buy or rent them at prices that make it feasible for developers to build and market them.

Our planning system has created a bottleneck through which it is impossible for applications to pass in the numbers needed. Our building regulations conspire to force prices higher and higher. Even regulations relating to the sale or rent of properties pushes up costs with demands that properties have energy performance certificates that no-one has any real use for.

We currently live in a society that prefers to see people living in cardboard boxes or shop doorways rather than being able to buy a bit of waste land and put up a wooden or tin shack in which to shelter. Everyone knows that they will go on to improve their properties as money becomes available. The problem is that this would not give big companies the profits they desire. Nor could the available land cope with the ever increasing numbers who are desperate to cut costs and find a place to live.

Far too much of the problem has been caused by government interference in the housing market. Housing associations who were supposed to provide cheap properties for rent actually went around buying up the lower priced properties that people on low incomes used to be able to afford to buy. They were elbowed out of the home ownership market by the very people who claimed to be helping and watched hopelessly as prices soared.

We used to have a thriving rental market. Then the campaigners who targeted home owners with rent caps and preventing them from evicting problem tenants. We used to have an excellent system that provided security of tenure to renters. It was called leasehold which allowed people to lease a piece of land and build their own home on it. Leases could sometimes run for 999 years, providing families a low cost rental for generations. They could buy or sell their properties, transferring the remaining lease to the new purchaser. But the campaigners thought it was wrong that people should lose their houses at the end of the lease. In reality they had either bought them at reduced prices due to the shortness of the remaining lease or they had lived there for years at low rent. And of course they could take away anything they had built on the land if they so wished.

The result was the end of a system that had provided security of tenure to generations of hybrid renter/owners. Land owners lost their property rights.

There seems to be an inbuilt hatred of anyone who profits from property ownership. Time for government to step back, compensate all of those its actions have harmed financially, undo the restrictive regulations and let the market find its own level. The alternative is to end immigration and let a declining population heal the housing shortage.

What goes around comes around

From America we have a pro-abortionist who was upset about a leaked Supreme Court document on abortion, who was also upset about a recent school shooting in Texas, arming himself with a Glock 17 pistol , pepper spray, a tactical knife and various other implements, and heading off to the California home of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh intending to murder him because he thought Mr. Kavanaugh might issue rulings that would loosen gun regulation.

Add to the mix a Democratic Senator, Chuck Schumer, who warned Brett Kavanaugh and another Trump nominated conservative justice that they ‘would pay the price’ and ‘won’t know what hit you’ if they voted to undo abortion legislation and compare it to the Democrats persecution and attempted impeachment of Donald Trump over the July 6 Capitol Hill riot.

As they say, what goes around comes around.

Yet another windfall tax

As predicted our green socialist chancellor has tasted the high of windfall tax and like every other addict is now craving more.

In order to bring bills down we need to get rid of the green subsidies that are pushing up everyone’s bills. Get rid of the regulations that shut down or prevented new traditional sources of energy and which got us into the easily predictable mess of shortages and let the market decide when green technologies are ready for the market and fit to invest in.

Government pushing the market into unsustainable positions can only create more energy price and shortage havoc.

The cowardly bullies better know as the British police have excelled themselves

The cowardly bullies better know as the British police have excelled themselves by tasering and effectively killing a man armed with a screwdriver – yes, you read that right – a screwdriver.

The oh-so-brave boys in blue didn’t dare go near his deadly weapon. They had to use a weapon that is banned for use by the public, even when their lives are at risk. That weapon and its use resulted in him falling into the river and dying.

What happened to using the least possible force necessary to contain a situation?

Is it time to remove tasers from the police arsenal since they seem incapable of working out when it is appropriate to use them?

Is it time to prosecute those who abuse their special position by using inappropriate force on people who are clearly ill and in need of help not an attack by a group of wannabe John Waynes?

Why Johnny Depp won in the US and lost in the UK

The first reason why Johnny Depp won in the US and lost in the UK is the fact that the US trial was decided by a Jury, a right that has long been lost for the majority of cases in the UK.

Juries are generally far more savvy than Judges when it comes down to deciding the rights and wrongs of the evidence put before them. They are also far more determined to punish wrongdoing on the part of the prosecution in criminal trials by handing down Not Guilty verdicts.

Johnny Depp has also been refused permission to appeal the UK case, although it is possible that there might be another attempt after the US win.

The second reason for the loss in the UK is the current hysteria that claims women must be believed whenever they claim abuse of any sort. Juries made up of ordinary people can usually see through that nonsense and understand that they need to actually consider the evidence given as opposed to accepting claims of abuse unless they can be shown to be false.

This all bodes ill for Laurence Fox who has been refused permission to have a Jury trial in the libel case being brought against him and in which he is counter-suing. Few Judges have the ability and courage to go against the current demands of Woke theory.

If we are to return to fair trials in the UK we need to reinstate Juries for all cases. Magistrates and Judges tend to be far too pro-prosecution and pro-the Woke status quo.