CUMMINGS' PARANOID VENDETTA

Dominic Cummings may well be a very clever man but he's also showing serious signs of being an obsessive psychopath.

It seems quite clear that, ever since his dismissal from his role as Boris Johnson's principal advisor, he's been working on a plan to gain revenge on his former boss. Completely ignoring his own highly questionable trip from London to Durham and Barnard's Castle during 'lockdown', he's spent the last 14 months accruing whatever dirt he can find to use against the Prime Minister in his crazed effort to have him removed from office. Even today, he's issued what he's described as a 'warning' that there are more damaging revelations to come and they'll continue to be drip fed to the media until Boris is ousted - if that's not a vendetta and action of a man with severe psychological, or even psychiatric, problems, I don't know what is. If there is so much more to come out, why not let it see the light of day now ? The only answers are either that doing so would not suit Cummings' purpose or that there are no such revelations and that this is merely rhetoric designed to create an atmosphere of fear and ramp up the pressure on the Prime Minister. 

Cummings has also refused to be interviewed in person by Sue Gray, the civil servant conducting the review into the 'Partygate' allegations against the Prime Minister and others. While Ms Gray has interviewed other witnesses, apparently including the Prime Minister himself, Cummings has agreed only to provide written responses to specific questions, claiming that this is to protect both himself and Ms Gray from lies and distortions which the Prime Minister would otherwise invent. How this actually makes sense is beyond me. What avoiding a face to face interview actually achieves is the avoidance of any deeper questioning that such an event might allow, the avoidance of being asked tangential questions and the potential exposure of Cummings own failings and motivations. It also speaks volumes about the paranoia from which Cummings appears to be suffering.

Dominic Cummings is giving every impression of a man who is paranoid, bitter and twisted. He hates Boris Johnson and will do anything he can to destroy him. Everything he does and says should be seen in this light. 

BORIS MUST STAY FOR THE GOOD OF OUR COUNTRY.

While Dominic Cummings seems determined to continue his personal, and vindictive, vendetta against Boris Johnson, at least some of those who have been screaming for Boris's head may need to be careful what they wish for.

Despite his acknowledged deficiencies, of which there are many, under Prime Minister Johnson the United Kingdom has escaped the clutches of the European Union, to the most part at least, and is undoubtedly in the best position of any European nation when it comes to tackling the COVID-19 epidemic. While others continue to thrash around and impose yet more Draconian measures, England has just about reached the end of restrictions and will soon be followed by Wales and Scotland, while even EU member Ireland is following suit, separated as she is from her fellow European states by ocean and the UK.

The outlook for the United Kingdom looks good on many fronts, even if there are major hurdles to be overcome - piles of debt, rising inflation, soaring immigration, problems in the NHS, social care, schools and universities, logjams in our justice system and more - but many of these are a result of government action, or inaction, over decades and cannot be laid at the door of the current incumbent of 10 Downing Street. In truth, now free of the shackles of the European Union and probably the first major Western economy to emerge from the epidemic, the United Kingdom is in pole position to steal a march on its rivals. If only it were that simple.

Standing in the way of real progress are numerous obstacles, foremost amongst them being the ongoing saga about the Prime Minister's own future. If his detractors win the day and he is ousted, who will replace him ? What policies will then be pursued ? Will Brexit and its benefits be preserved, or will we slide back into the European maw ? Too many questions and too few answers, even long before we get to the little matter of who amongst the potential rivals for the leadership might be able to stir the electorate sufficiently for the Conservatives to win another general election.

Boris Johnson needs to survive if the benefits of his overwhelming success at the polls in 2019 are to have any real chance of being fully realised, and those who are plotting against him need to understand this. Yes, he is flawed, but who is not ? What we need is a leader who will take charge and make high level decisions, others can implement policy. We need genuine controls on immigration, lower, not higher, taxes, less state involvement in all things, the clearing away of ludicrous, entirely subjective crimes and the freeing of police to catch criminals rather than those who commit social offences, true reform of the NHS and social care, a complete rethink about our hopeless education system - I could go on.

Which of the potential successors to Boris Johnson is likely to promote any of these vital policies ? Rishi Sunak - not a chance; Michael Gove - not in a month of Sundays; Liz Truss - who knows ? These are all politicians, pure and simple, with nothing but an eye on the polls and trying to ensure they rise to the top. Boris is different and that is why he should stay as he is the only one who just might make some inroads into at least one or two of the major issues now facing our country.

ENGLAND'S CRICKETERS - HOW MUCH LOWER CAN THEY SINK ?

The final humiliation for England's cricket team was reserved for the fifth match of their series against Australia, played in Hobart, Tasmania, probably the antipodean location most similar to that with which they should be accustomed and comfortable playing in.

But no such luck. How can one adequately describe their abysmal performance in this Ashes series ? Humiliating ? Embarrassing ? Shocking ? Disgraceful ?  These and many other words could be applied, and yet neither the coach nor captain seem to believe that they should be sacked. How can this be ?

Anyone with an ounce of pride would surely have offered their resignation on the back of leading their national team in such a series of shameful performances, or been sacked, but not this lot it seems. Captain Joe Root says that he's still the man to put things right while coach Chris Silverwood is strangely silent about his own future. My God !

Is it possible to contemplate an England football manager surviving a year of results like those achieved by this rag bag of coach, captain and players ? Of course not. Would those at the Football Association responsible for the national team still be procrastinating ? Not a chance ! So why are the bureaucrats who run English cricket so inactive ?

English cricket is a mess. The national team relies on Root and Stokes, who seems to be injured more often than not, Broad and Anderson, while the rest come and go through a revolving door. Yes, these four are fine players but a team needs more than one top batsman, a frequently unfit all-rounder and two ageing bowlers if they are to compete. Broad will be 36 in June and Anderson 40 in July - it's well past time that they had been replaced by up and coming competition, but where is that competition ? Where are the new young batsmen and spin bowlers, pushing for places in the national team ?

The answer is that there aren't any. The decimation of real cricket, the County Championship, and its replacement by a mish mash of limited overs knockabouts has effectively removed the development pathway for the next generation of Test Match players. While responsibility for the appalling performance of the England team in recent times lies fairly and squarely with Silverwood and Root, ultimate responsibility for the mess rests with those who run the England and Wales Cricket Board, the ECB.

Once again they will say that lessons must be learnt and changes will be made. There'll  be yet another review conducted by the same tired old hacks which will achieve nothing. What is needed is a genuine clear out and a genuinely different approach. Fat chance !

DOWNING STREET PARTIES v REALITY.

It seems that while the rest of the population was meant to be in seclusion, hiding from each other for fear of catching the dreaded COVID-19 virus, a mish-mash of civil servants working in various government offices held parties. It's even suggested that the Prime Minister himself attended at least one or two of these and the media is utterly obsessed with the whole story.

Forgive me for thinking this is somewhat ridiculous. At a time when our country is faced with an energy crisis, inflation at levels not seen in decades and threatening to rise further, NHS waiting list soaring to previously unimagined heights, a manic and hugely expensive charge towards the unobtainable goal of "net zero", 'woke' ideology running riot through our schools, universities and many major organisations, and illegal immigrants pouring across the English Channel in their tens of thousands, the media is obsessed with whether or not there were parties that 'broke COVID rules'. 

Add in the threats posed by thousands of Russian troops massing on the  Ukrainian border and increasing Chinese belligerence towards Taiwan, a general concern about China's growing economic power over the rest of the world as well as its attempts to subvert our own democracy by placing a spy at the heart of our parliamentary system, and the general weakness of the current US leadership, is the holding of parties really of any significance other than in the minds of the media and political opponents of the present government ?

One wonders how many of those now making the loudest protests about government parties are all that squeaky clean when it comes to their own conduct during the times in question. Was Dominic Cummings, whom one has to believe is a prime instigator of the 'Partygate' assault, alone in inventing a suitable story to justify 'breaking the rules' ? Who else might have got involved in the odd gathering or two ? I'm fairly sure that many of the rest of us did, regardless of the ever-changing rules. Yes, some people were more put upon than others, but let's have a sense of proportion.

It's high time that our representatives and the media started dealing with things that really matter, instead of prattling on about the rubbish which makes short term headlines.

DJOKOVIC v AUSTRALIA - WHO WILL WIN ?

Whatever is going on regarding Novak Djokovic's visa to enter Australia for their tennis tournament, his on court rival, Rafa Nadal, has summed things up perfectly. He points out that Djokovic knew the rules and has had plenty of time to sort things out - he has only himself to blame if its all gone wrong.

That said, there does seem to have been some confusion as Djokovic presumably believed that he had been given a valid visa and permission to enter the country. However, has he also tried to use his fame and celebrity status to try to almost blackmail the Australian authorities into caving in to him ? It seems to me that he may well have tried to force the authorities to accept him, claiming he had a visa, arriving and presenting himself in what he hoped would be a fait accompli. 

Clearly, the Australian authorities have been put, or found themselves, in a difficult position but they really have only one way out. That is to deny Djokovic entry unless he complies with the rules they have in place; allowing him some special status would be utterly unacceptable to the majority of the Australian population as well as probably to most of his potential fellow competitors in the forthcoming Australian Open Tennis Tournament.

I have no problem with the stance Djokovic has taken regarding disclosure of his vaccination status but he has to understand that others may have different views and approaches. He has to understand that he has no right to force his beliefs on others and that, regardless of his beliefs, he has to abide by the laws and rules imposed by governments and other organisations. 

Of course, Djokovic may still be able to convince the Australian authorities that he should be granted a medical exemption from their entry regulations and he may even go on to win the tournament yet again. However, if his appeal fails and he is deported, he will have learnt a salutary lesson - not even the world's best tennis player is above the law.