BBC GOES LEFT, LEFT, LEFT !!

As if to prove its left-wing credentials, the BBC's 'Andrew Marr' show has opted to have a gaggle of guests who are heavily weighted against Theresa May and Brexit.

Toby Young appeared as the right wing representative to review the day's newspapers and spoke positively while recognizing that things were far from ideal. However, we then had George Osborne, the former Conservative Chancellor of the Exchequer and prospective Prime Minister himself, who was sacked by Mrs May when she became Party Leader, has since become editor of the Evening Standard and carried out a vitriolic campaign against her during the last few weeks. On today's programme, Osborne was given free rein to carry on his campaign on air and made it clear that he continues to be bitter and twisted.

Nothing much needs to be said about Polly Toynbee who seems to be beloved of the BBC and is a 'hard left' journalist and commentator. Then there was Jeremy Corbyn, looking like the cat who swallowed the cream even though he actually lost the election; there are few serious politicians in the country who are more left-wing than him.

The supposed 'political balance' was then achieved by bringing in Michael Fallon and Michael Heseltine. While Fallon is an honourable and loyal member of Mrs May's cabinet and government, Heseltine has rarely been anything other than trouble for the Conservative Party and its various leaders, having failed to become such himself. He is pompous, arrogant and a strong Europhile; he is no lover of Theresa May or of Brexit. His contribution was centred on Brexit being a 'cancer at the heart of the Conservative Party', while completely ignoring the fact that it is actually the will of the people; he still refuses to accept the result of the referendum.

Finally, we had a socialist Member of the European Parliament who was at pains to point out how difficult everything was going to be.

Taken together, this added up to 2 voices speaking for Theresa May, her government and Brexit, and 5 speaking against. Balance ?!!

ELECTION RESULT SERVES NO ONE.

Well, well, well !

In a catastrophic result for the Conservatives, they've lost their majority when they expected to increase it significantly. It seems that the people have done their thinking and decided that they don't much like Theresa May and the Conservatives, while many more than was expected decided that they did rather like Jeremy Corbyn's offering of 'tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend'. The polls were mostly wrong, again.

There is no doubt that Corbyn ran an effective campaign with many frankly populist policies; he also seems to have managed to get a substantial number of younger voters to support him and the final outcome of around 41% of the vote is dramatically higher than the opinion polls were indicating throughout the campaign period. Corbyn's success may also owe something to him being a true socialist rather than a 'middle-of-the-road, politician; he may have galvanised many of the traditional Labour supporters who have drifted away from the Party in recent years as it became more centrist in approach.

On the Conservative side, 44% of the votes would normally have produced a healthy majority in Parliament but, in this extraordinary election, it's only resulted in the Conservatives being the largest party; while they seem likely to be able to remain in office with the support of the Democratic Unionists from Ulster, it will be far from straightforward and policies will have to be watered down, perhaps significantly in some cases.

Theresa May's position has been seriously weakened though the expectation is that she will remain as Prime Minister. However, she has suffered a huge blow and must carry much of the blame for this wholly unexpected result. Six weeks ago, the Conservatives were apparently heading for a landslide victory but a quite appalling campaign all but destroyed them; the furore over the funding of social care, issues over the NHS and a crazy policy to replace free school dinners with free school breakfasts, the policy to meddle with the 'Winter Fuel Allowance' and May's refusal to appear in the televised 'Leaders' Debate', as well as her stuttering performance on the social issues. Indeed, the initial approach of concentrating the campaign on Theresa May, rather than on the Party, and the absence of other major figures such as Boris Johnson and Liam Fox from the frontline seems to have been a huge mistake. It also seems certain that the terrorist attacks in Manchester and London allied to Labour's promise to put more police on the streets caused many to turn to Labour.

The Conservative miscalculation is undoubtedly the worst since February 1974 when Ted Heath called an election expecting the country to support his stand against the miners; on that occasion, the country gave Heath the elbow and Labour actually ended up forming a minority government; they then went to the country again a few months later to give them a majority and 5 years in power which ultimately produced chaos and Margaret Thatcher.

What will happen next is anyone's guess. It is possible that the Conservatives could remain in office for a full 5 years though their position is obviously highly vulnerable; 1 or 2 by-election losses could easily prove fatal, although the '5 Year Parliament Act' could now act in their favour. It will be difficult to put through their manifesto, if not impossible, and 'Brexit' negotiations will certainly be more problematic. Theresa May, herself, seems very unlikely to be able to survive a full 5 years and there must be a possibility of another election within the next 2 years; if that happens, a Labour government under Jeremy Corbyn becomes a distinct possibility.

Whatever the eventual outcome, this result serves no one. It is disastrous for the Conservatives and could become catastrophic for the country if Corbyn ever gets into power. Those who voted for Corbyn this time didn't get what they wished for; next time they may well get their wish but, as is often said, 'you should be very careful what you wish for as you may get it'.

SO WHO WILL WIN ?

As election day approaches and the party's campaigns are wound up, only one question remains - who will win ?

6 weeks ago there was no doubt that the Conservatives were heading for a spectacular landslide victory. Labour were in total disarray and the Conservatives seemed to be riding the crest of a wave. However, things are now somewhat different and the opinion polls are giving a very mixed view of the likely outcome. What has happened ?

Firstly, Theresa May and her Conservative colleagues have run a distinctly lacklustre and rather messy campaign. They've put forward one or two policy proposals which seem to have been badly miscalculated and Mrs May no longer looks like the strong and steadfast leader that she was initially portrayed as and on which basis much of the early part of the campaign was fought. In the end, the damage to the Conservatives campaign hasn't been enormous, although their predicted share of the final vote has probably fallen by 4 or 5 percentage points.

On the other hand, Labour's campaign has been one of unashamed bribery. Populist policies and promises to increase spending on the NHS and on education, to abolish university tuition fees and to put more police officers on the streets have met with general approval from many traditional Labour supporters, as well as some others, and Jeremy Corbyn has usually cut a fairly sympathetic figure. All of this has contributed to the predicted share of the vote for Labour rising by 7 or 8 points, reducing the overall deficit to the Conservatives quite dramatically. The lead may now be down to somewhere in the region of 5 - 10 % and some pundits are even talking about a 'hung Parliament'.

While the campaigns started with Mrs May being the adored figure, they seem to be ending with Mr Corbyn having become the more appealing one of the 2; Tim Farron of the Liberal Democrats has gone largely unnoticed as have most of the other peripheral leaders. In Scotland, Nicola Sturgeon's SNP seems to have lost a degree of support and may lose several of its seats, though it will still be easily the largest party in that part of the UK.

Will Corbyn's popular cuddliness and promises to throw vast quantities of our money at public services win the day or, when it comes to the crunch, will the electorate go for the less cuddly Mrs May and her distinctly less exciting but financially much more prudent approach ? For what it's worth, I think that sense will prevail and I predict an overall Conservative majority of about 60.

All will be revealed come Friday morning.

CORBYN'S CASH VERSUS MAY'S POLICY.

Now that the general election is only 3 days distant, things are hotting up. Following Saturday's events in London, terrorism has come to the fore as an election issue to be fought over, though the major party leaders seem to have very different approaches.

Theresa May, saying that "enough is enough", has indicated that we must become far less tolerant of extremism and must take serious steps to prevent the radicalization of young Muslims. She has proposed that the major internet companies take much greater responsibility with regard to the prevention of communication between terrorists and has indicated that a future Conservative government would quickly review and tighten terrorist legislation.

In contrast, Jeremy Corbyn has followed his previous path of simply suggesting that vast sums of money should be thrown at the problem; his plan, if 'plan' it can be called, is to recruit an additional 10,000 police officers. How additional police officers would help to combat the issue of terrorist activity hasn't been stated, nor where all these recruits would come from nor how long it would take to get them in place. In other words, Corbyn's 'policy' is no more than a populist, ill-defined and ultimately meaningless piece of political rhetoric.

That said, Theresa May's, proposals, while sounding very strong and Prime Ministerial, also lack any firm detail. However, she has, at least, indicated that, if returned as Prime Minister, she will pursue a much stronger and more active approach than has hitherto been the case. She has indicated a change of direction and that a government led by her would take a much tougher line. "Enough is enough" sounds right.

May has indicated policy direction while Corbyn has spoken of numbers. I know which I'll be voting for.

TIME TO INTERN ALL TERRORISM SUSPECTS - NOW !

Another murderous attack in London last night must surely bring about some serious rethinking of our response to such things. This time, 3 men drove a white van into pedestrians on London Bridge before then getting out, running into various venues and attacking people with knives before they were shot dead by police. It's reported that 6 people died, plus the 3 terrorists, and 48 were injured in these incidents.

It's previously been reported that our security services know of many people whom they think may have terrorist connections and that they are actively 'tracking' several hundred of these. Following the vicious attacks in Manchester and now in London, it must be time to go well beyond 'tracking' such suspects; this is war and war calls for much more active measures.

Those whom the security services are 'tracking' should be rounded up and interned along with all others whose activities have created interest. Immigration of nationals of countries such as Iraq, Syria, Iran, Libya, Algeria, Afghanistan and Pakistan should be stopped. Other travel between such countries and the UK should be strictly controlled and the possibility of young people going to them to be 'radicalised' must be ended. Internet sites and services known to be connected with these countries should be blocked. In other words, we should do everything possible to keep terrorists out and to prevent them from communicating with their compatriots.

These fanatics need to be taken off of our streets and it is time to take clear and decisive action. No more shilly-shallying, no more 'multi-culturalism'. Intern them, deport them, shoot them.

CORBYN TRIES TO BRIBE US WITH OUR OWN MONEY.

It is clear that Jeremy Corbyn has only way real policy as the election campaign enters its final week and that is to buy votes.

Promises to abolish student fees and an indication that a Labour government might also cancel existing student debts are policies aimed directly at buying the votes of students, though at a huge cost to the country in general. Other promises to provide extra resources to the NHS and to schools while nationalizing an assortment of services mean billions of pounds would have to be found from higher taxes and / or increased borrowing.

What no one seems to have pointed out is that all this money that a Corbyn-led administration would commit has to come from somewhere. As has been pointed out, there is no magic 'money tree'; governments have no money of their own, all they have is what they can wheedle out of the people. Every penny that governments spend comes from us, one way or another.

Income tax and national insurance, VAT, insurance premium tax, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, council tax and corporation tax; tobacco duty, alcohol duty, vehicle excise duty, fuel duty, stamp duty, air passenger duty, gambling duties, all manor of environmental taxes and duties, business rates, assorted levies and heaven alone knows how many more.

This vast array of taxes, duties and levies all take money from the people who often seem to forget that taxes paid by business are ultimately passed onto their customers. In the end, all taxes are paid by the people, all of the people and not just those who can easily afford to pay them. Sometimes, we pay tax on top of tax, as with the VAT charged on top of the fuel duty added to the cost of fuel and, of course, the basic price of the fuel includes an element to enable the producer - BP, Shell, ESSO etc. - to pay their employer's national insurance, corporation tax and so on. We all pay more than enough already without allowing a Corbyn government to rob us of still more.

Even when governments hide their financial excesses by borrowing instead of taxing, the people still pay. Borrowing incurs interest charges which the people pay annually through their taxes. It also incurs debt which has to be repaid over a number years, meaning that future generations can end up paying for the services and benefits enjoyed by the current generation, surely the ultimate and most pernicious con-trick perpetrated by governments. In the end, someone has to pay though today's politicians don't worry about that as they won't be around to carry the can.

All Corbyn is attempting to do is to bribe us with our own money. He will happily promise to spend whatever he can get his hands on but it's all smoke and mirrors. Don't be fooled and don't let this conman loose on our economy.

ELECTION DEBATE : WAS IT WORTH THE EFFORT ?

Last night's election debate on the BBC told viewers nothing that they didn't already know, but highlighted the way in which politicians distort facts to their own benefit.

With Theresa May opting to be elsewhere, Amber Rudd represented the Conservatives. She was opposed by a 5 socialists and Paul Nuttall, whose UKIP party policies seem to be designed to appeal mostly to the extremes of both left and right. Unsurprisingly, the socialist mob rounded on Ms Rudd and threw as much mud as they could muster.

In essence, Ms Rudd stuck to the Conservative line of economic competence while the assembled socialists all made wild claims of crippling austerity and vast poverty afflicting our nation. All said that they would throw huge sums of money at these supposed problems. All did no more than continue their principal policy of buying votes with promises of making everyone rich.

No one ever questions what 'austerity' really means nor does anyone question the claimed levels of 'poverty' that the left claims exist. In truth, the current 'austerity' is nothing of the sort and true poverty is virtually non-existent in the UK. While some people may be less well-off than others, very, very few live on the streets as the likes of Caroline Lucas of the Green Party would have us believe.

One of Labour's big promises is to increase the 'living wage' to £10 an hour; they say this would relieve the supposed poverty that exists. What they don't say is how such a move would impact on business, productivity and employment or on inflation; inevitably, all three would suffer negative effects, compounded by the proposed increases to corporation tax. Inevitably, businesses would become less profitable and many would close; both inflation and unemployment would rise. So much for the socialist nirvana.

While Corbyn and his main socialist allies, Caroline Lucas and Leanne Wood of Plaid Cymru, all spout this same nonsense, Tim Farron of the Liberal Democrats adds his party's determination to keep the UK in the European Union to his mishmash of policies; despite the outcome of the referendum, Farron still keeps harping on about how unfair it all is and how the people just don't understand, or didn't know 'what type of Brexit' they were voting for. It's all tripe. The Scottish Nationalists want independence and UKIP wants immigration sorted out.

So there it is. No one learned anything new and what we saw was 7 politicians squabbling amongst themselves, mostly trying to see who could score most points off of the others, while 6 of them took pot-shots at the absent Prime Minister at every opportunity. Truly excruciating television.

In the end, the voters' choice remains the same. A degree of economic stability and a controlled exit from the European Union under the Conservatives, or higher taxes, higher borrowing, rip-roaring inflation and economic catastrophe under Labour and an amalgam of other left wing parties. 7 days to go.