TIME TO IMPLEMENT BREXIT, NOT TO RAIL AGAINST IT.

With "Project Fear" still in full swing, it's no surprise that the Director General of the C.B.I. has been on the airwaves again telling us all how terrible Brexit is and what a total catastrophe a "No Deal" Brexit would be. That the C.B.I. represents only a very small section of British companies seems to be considered irrelevant as does that fact the its Director General has little real business experience.

Carolyn Fairbairn, who ahs been the Director General since 2015, is another of the privately educated  and privileged elite who feel that they "know best". Private school, followed by a degree in the largely esoteric subject of Economics at Cambridge, an MA in "International Relations" in the USA and an MBA from the "European Institute of Business Administration", set her up for a career in and around the financial services industry. She has worked for the World Bank, McKinsey's management consultants, the Competition and Markets Authority, the Financial Services Authority, and others, as well as having roles with the BBC and ITV. In other words, she's never had a proper job.

What she knows about  manufacturing industry, retail, pharmaceutical and the rest can probably be written on the head of a pin, and yet she feels able to tell the country what it should do as if she speaks for all UK business and is obviously right. That some of the C.B.I's. members actually think differently is never mentioned. Nor is the fact that the former head of another business organisation, the British Chambers of Commerce, supports Brexit and has taken a leading role in various pro-Brexit groups. In pursuing this course, John Longworth, a state educated and self-made man, found himself at odds with too many of his colleagues and resigned from the B.C.C.; he then stood as a candidate for the Brexit Party and has been elected to the new European parliament in the recent elections.

The media makes much of the rhetoric that issues from the likes of Ms Fairbairn but is mostly oblivious to the voices raised in opposition. Sir James Dyson, Tim Martin of Wetherspoons, Sir Jim Ratcliffe, Lord Bamford of JCB - these are significant business figures who are all in favour of ridding themselves of the European straitjacket. Even today, I've seen or heard reports and interviews which have been blatantly biased against Brexit, Carolyn Fairbairn being feted by the BBC, and 2 non-entities being given airtime on Sky, one an out and out left wing Remainer and the other calling the Daily Telegraph newspaper a 'comic'. Where were the voices in opposition from the other side of the argument ?

With the left leaning, liberal elite so determined to do anything and everything to prevent Brexit, it is astonishing that there is still such a groundswell in its favour. Threats of economic collapse and political mayhem have still not convinced the populations to convert ; yes a second referendum may produce an opposite result but by no more that the 52 - 48 result of the first. What then ?

Why in God's name can't the Fairbairns of this world simply shut up and accept the result of the 2016 referendum ? Whether they like it or not, the people voted for Brexit and it's time that they knuckled down to doing what is necessary to implement that decision, rather than spending their time trying to reverse it.

BREXIT IS THE PROGRESSIVE POLICY, REMAINERS ARE THE HARD LEFT.

Why is it that the forces which normally refer to themselves as 'progressive' are the main drivers of keeping the United Kingdom locked into the socialist bureaucracy that is the European Union ? While many Conservatives and, to be fair, a good many Labour supporters, are eager to progress to a position in which the UK can take advantage of the freedoms to be gained by leaving the EU, it is the Liberal Democrats and, now, the Labour party's hierarchy which are leading the campaign against Brexit.

Lionel Shriver, writing in the Daily Telegraph a couple of weeks ago questioned the way in which the Left wing of politics has subverted our language and made 'Left' synonymous with good and 'Right' synonymous with bad. Claiming to be Left wing is automatically viewed as being on the side of the people, justice, fairness, equality and progress, while even being thought of as being Right wing immediately raises visions of racism, bigotry, privilege and regression. Anyone vaguely Right wing is, these days, labelled 'Hard Right', as are the Conservative party's anti-EU European Research Group for no other reason than that they support a quick and clean Brexit. Anyone promoting genuinely Right wing policies is 'Far Right', an epithet which the Left has made synonymous with NAZI and all that such an allusion brings to mind.

Why does the Right not fight back ? There is nothing remotely 'progressive' about the policies of the Left, in fact their policies are rooted in the class struggles of previous centuries. Their 'progressive' policies demand ever higher taxation, ever greater state interference and control and evermore bureaucracy, with the associated vast number of 'jobs for the boys'. This 'progressive' approach inevitably leads to support for the elephantine bureaucracy that is the European Union. The awful thing is that a substantial chunk of what used to be Right wing politicians has gravitated into a slushy 'centre ground' where they are almost indistinguishable from their Left wing opponents. Consequently, what might be termed the 'New Right' is not Right at all, but a sort of nothingness which offers no opposition to the policies of the 'New Left' which is, in reality, where true extremism lies.

Keeping the UK in the European Union is a policy being pursued by those who don't want their cosy little world to be disturbed by anything so distressing as progress. They have no faith in the UK's ability to thrive outside of the rigid framework created by the bureaucrats and self-serving leaders of the EU; they don't want to lose the opportunities for self-glorification that flow from our membership of this ridiculous, corrupt and unaccountable political construct. To this end they have woven a web of fear around the very idea of ever leaving it, never getting their terrifying predictions right and rarely being specific - it's been good enough to simply assail us all with vague statements about economic collapse, aircraft falling out of the skies, terrorists running riot, drug supplies drying up and so on.

None of the claims made by the anti-Brexit brigade are true and yet none of those making them are in court; neither has anyone else ever been taken to court over the many dubious claims made in other referendums or elections. However, opponents of Brexit will stop at nothing and Boris Johnson, who made various claims during the referendum campaign in 2016 and is, of course, a proponent of Brexit, is to appear in court to answer charges that some of his claims were misleading. Not only does the Left wing subvert our language but now it subverts our legal processes as well.

Don't be fooled by the fact that many Conservative Members of Parliament support staying in the EU, these are part of the left leaning cabal which now dominates our country. They also hate the thought that Johnson, or some other genuine Right winger, might win the Conservative party's leadership war and will connive in any dirty plot designed to stop such an appalling thing, in their eyes, from happening. Some, such as Dominic Grieve, have threatened to leave the party, good riddance I say; others, Philip Hammond for one, have threatened to bring down the government should a right winger dare to lead the country in a truly Right wing fashion.

For far too long our Conservative party has been led by an elite of highly privileged career politicians, far more interested in holding on to power than in arguing the toss with an equally dysfunctional Labour opposition. They have caved in to every crazy 'middle of the road' idea advocated by the liberal elite and have bent over backwards to adopt every wishy-washy policy they can find. They have been no more 'progressive' than those they claim to oppose and so must be labelled accordingly - our Conservative party is not conservative at all, it is just another version of a socialist one.

Progress means promoting genuine opportunity and that means leaving the European Union, scrapping all of the highly restrictive rules and regulations which place enormous burdens on business, not to mention individuals, and finally being honest. We are not all equal; men and women are different; difference is good; the NHS is not the envy of the world. These things and many more have to be acknowledged and we must rid ourselves of the inherently socialist ethos that we have become immured in.

What chance ?

EURO ELECTIONS PROVE NOTHING, RESOLVE NOTHING.

Now that the European Parliament elections are over and the results mostly known, the question is "what has changed ?". The answer has to be "very little".

As in 2014, those who favour a quick exit from the European Union voted in droves for the main proponents of such a measure, now the Brexit party; those who favour stopping Brexit altogether voted for the Liberal Democrats, giving that party a huge boost form their dire result in 2014. The losers were the Labour Party, riven by divisions and failing to send out any clear policy message, and the Conservatives whose traditional supporters deserted them in consequence of Theresa May's appallingly bad attempts to negotiate the UK's exit from the EU. From 25 seats 10 years ago, the Conservatives now have only 3 - if that isn't political collapse, I don't know what is.

However, all of this mayhem has changed very little. While members of the political elite have come trotting out to claim all manner of things, mostly using the results to justify whichever course they themselves favour, it's really been a case of "smoke and mirrors" accompanied by "lies, damned lies and statistics". Brexiteers have shouted that the results demonstrate a clear demand for a quick Brexit, while Remainers have claimed that they show an obvious desire for either another referendum or for Brexit to be abandoned completely. In support of this latter aim, Remainers have continued to use entirely unsupported, and unsupportable, claims that any "form" of Brexit will be damaging to our country and a "No Deal" Brexit will be economically catastrophic. In making such claims they blithely ignore the fact that the identical claims that have been made for the last 3 years have proved to be nothing but scare stories, with the UK's economy performing significantly better than the other economies of the EU.

The result is that entrenched positions remain entrenched. The Labour Party is interested only in gaining power and will now do whatever it things will help it in this ambition; if this means that it moves to support calls for another referendum, that is what it will do. For the Conservative Party, mired in internal turmoil, its new leader will have to decide whether to pursue Brexit at any cost or to adopt a softer approach in order to try to bring the party back together and to regain lost ground. The Liberal Democrats must just be hoping that Brexit carries on being an issue as it's clear that they are currently benefitting enormously from the confusion elsewhere. 

What is astonishing is that a party which didn't exist 2 months ago has not only done well but has trounced the rest. The Brexit Party has topped the polls across most of England and Wales and gained almost a third of the total votes; it is clearly the most popular party, gaining 28 seats in the new European Parliament. Whether it can achieve a similarly spectacular result should there be a general election in the near future is another matter although its leader, the charismatic Nigel Farage, is promising to produce a full manifesto for such an eventuality. If there is a general election and The Brexit Party does anything like this well, it spells serious problems for both the conservatives and Labour; it would almost certainly mean a hung parliament with, who knows what outcome.

However, in the final analysis, nothing has really changed very much. These were elections for the European Parliament and have little immediate bearing on the real everyday lives of voters; they are, therefore, inclined to vote more for what they believe in than for traditional party loyalties; in a general election, things would inevitably be different. The political elite will continue to bluster and procrastinate, prevaricate and pontificate, and, eventually, come to some form of compromise that suits their own vested interests rather than bothering about what the electorate may want or have voted for. Any meaningful resolution of the Brexit conundrum will be further frustrated by the internal machinations of the European Union which now enters its own period of effective paralysis and inaction as the members jostle and connive in pursuit of assorted coalition arrangements over the coming months and look to decide who will take over the posts currently held by the likes of Juncker, Tusk and assorted others.

The country remains fairly evenly split over the vexed question of Brexit. A second referendum will resolve nothing - if Leave wins narrowly again, the Remainers will still call for the UK to remain tied to the EU's apron strings, while if Remain wins, Leave will call "FOUL" and demand a third referendum to resolve the 'draw'. A general election will also resolve nothing and may well put the hard left Marxists of Jeremy Corbyn's party in control.

Where do we go from her ? I wish I knew.

MAY FIRES HERSELF - THE RACE IS ON !

So now we know.

Theresa May will formally resign as leader of the Conservative party on Friday 7th June and the search for a new leader will formally begin in the following week. She will remain as Prime Minister until that search reaches its conclusion.

Her statement outside Downing Street just now was clearly intended to set out the successes of her Premiership as well as acknowledging that she had been unable to resolve the matter of Brexit, but ended with her voice breaking and close to tears as she referred to her love for the country. 

We now have the beginning of a new era. Whatever agreement has been made with her party colleagues, campaigning to replace her has already begun and the many potential candidates are lining up in droves. Boris Johnson may be the bookies' favourite but how often does the favourite fall long before the last fence ? Others may find that they have too little support amongst their parliamentary colleagues and won't even make it to the starting gun, while there's always the possibility of an outsider coming from nowhere to snatch victory on the line.

Johnson, Gove, Raab, McVey, Javid, Hunt, Stewart, Rudd, Mordaunt, Baker, Truss, Leadsom, Hancock - one of these or someone else ?

All will be revealed over the course of the next couple of months.

WHO WILL RID US OF MAY ?

The 'Peter Principle' is a concept in management theory that people in a hierarchy are promoted until they reach a level at which they are no longer competent to fulfil their role. Theresa May seems to be a perfect example of this principle in action.

Following 6 years of relative success as Home Secretary, Mrs May found herself propelled upwards in July 2016, at least partly as she was seen as being the least divisive option to succeed David Cameron as leader of her party and Prime Minister. Ever since, she has presided over nothing but a decline of party, government and her own position as she has failed miserably to get to grips with the increased responsibilities of her elevated office. Her initial procrastination over the matter of the 'Article 50' notice and the calling of an unnecessary general election, for which the Conservative campaign was horrendously mismanaged, presaged nothing but calamity. May's approach in the election campaign miraculously snatched defeat from the jaws of a certain crushing victory, setting up the basis for the current situation.

Media reports have made it clear that she has failed to delegate effectively and has attempted to micro-manage the most problematic issue of her premiership, Brexit. Those appointed to the post of Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, have found themselves side lined and ignored; 2 have resigned, David Davis and Dominic Raab, in protest. Assorted junior ministers have also left that department as Mrs May established her own 'Brexit office' under her own direct control.

As if this wasn't enough, Mrs May then proceeded to agree to various terms dictated by the European Union which she must have known would be unacceptable to many of her own supporters. She attempted, 3 times, to bludgeon this agreement through both her cabinet and Parliament, losing still more senior ministers along the way - Boris Johnson, Esther McVey and now Andrea Leadsom - plus a host of junior ministers, mostly as a result of her handling of the Brexit question.

Her government is now in a state of collapse, her party is in danger of being wiped out in today's elections for the European Parliament, elections which simply should not be taking place in the UK, and her own authority is non-existent. Her MPs are in open revolt and her days, even hours, are numbered.

Given such a catastrophic situation, how is it that she has lasted so long ? There has never been any real prospect of her withdrawal agreement gaining parliamentary approval and yet she has stubbornly pressed on; even the most massive defeats in parliamentary history have not deterred her and yet she has remained in office. Why ? How ?

The truth is that her fellow Conservative MPs have simply not been able to find an alternative leader and none has had the guts to really stir things up. There seems to be greater enthusiasm for a 'Stop Boris' campaign than for anything else. There have been occasional, but fruitless, attempts to make something happen but, until now, these have petered out and May has been allowed to soldier on. Instead of acting decisively, the pretenders to Mrs May's throne have fiddled, tinkered, talked without saying anything meaningful and generally failed to achieve anything. There has been plenty of rhetoric and much bombast but very little has come of any of it. The result is probably the most almighty mess in which this country has ever found itself.

Even now, when Mrs May's tenure is over in all but name, there is delay and procrastination. It's reported that the 1922 Committee of Conservative backbench MPs has held a vote about what to do next, but the result is a secret and won't be revealed until some future, unknown, date. Andrea Leadsom's resignation last night could have been the signal for real action but it's been followed with more nothingness. Currently, we're told that Mrs May is to meet the chairman of the 1922 Committee on Friday, but to what end is unknow. There are suggestions that May will resign, possibly on Friday, possibly on Monday once the results of what is certain to be a calamitous Euro election are known, and possibly by June 10th. This simply isn't good enough.

Members of Parliament are playing politics at a time of national humiliation, paralysis and crisis. The Euro elections are already a lost cause so why wait ? If anything, acting yesterday might have helped to boost the Conservative vote today, even if only marginally. As things are, the electorate have a choice between a hopelessly divided and incompetent Conservative government, a Marxist led opposition, a bunch of pro-Remain parties each out for their own, largely socialist, interests, and the Brexit party which threatens to knock the rest into a cocked hat and could even morph in to a replacement, and real, Conservative party in due course.

If Conservative MPs don't act decisively in the next 48 hours then the sad truth is that not one of them is fit for promotion to the office o First Lord of the Treasury. Leaders act and act ruthlessly, whatever the short term consequences may be, for long term good. It is high time for some one to show true leadership qualities and take action, rather than waiting around for someone else to start the ball rolling. In 1940, when the Cabinet wanted Lord Halifax, a pacifist and appeaser, to replace Neville Chamberlain as Prime Minister, the King took charge and called for Winston Churchill. Today's crisis may not be quite that grave, yet, but similar action is called for. If that means Boris Johnson at Number 10, so be it; anyone will be better than the present incumbent.

Mrs May has to go and has to go now. Who will step up to the plate and make it happen ? Who will be the modern day King ? Who, our modern day Churchill ?

VOTE BREXIT ON 23RD MAY !!!

Those who want to prevent Brexit make much of the supposedly misleading claims made by the 'Leave' campaign prior to the 2016 referendum, but they say nothing about the claims made by their own side. In fact, they simply say, or imply, that voters were so seriously misled that they didn't understand the realities of Brexit and should be offered another chance to vote.

That this is utter bilge should be obvious to anyone with an ounce of intelligence. In every campaign, be it for elections or, as in this case, for a referendum, the opposing sides make claims about what they will do, or what will happen, if successful and also make claims about what will happen if the other side wins. At the time of the referendum, 'Leave' told us that success for them would mean freedom from EU bureaucracy, freedom to make our own trade deals, a substantial saving to the public purse which could be reinvested in public services and an altogether brighter future for the UK.

On the other hand, the 'Remain' side told us little about what staying in the EU would mean beyond vague references to the supposed safety and security to be gained from remaining staying in this supra-national organisation. They concentrated far more on telling voters of the horrors that awaited should we be stupid enough to vote to leave. We were told that we would suffer financial and economic ruin immediately after the vote and that there would be terrible implications for trade and tourism. Agreements regarding air flights would no longer apply and crossing borders would become shockingly difficult; there'd be massive problems in obtaining drugs and other medical supplies that come from Europe and there'd be all manner of tariffs introduced which would make many goods much more expensive. 

That none of the horror stories were anything other than scaremongering, or show any sign of being realised, is something which those who are so keen to prevent Brexit never mention. Indeed, even those who are anxious to leave the EU as soon as possible say little about it, presumably because raising the subject simply gives their opponents an excuse to remind the public of their own extravagant claims about extra money for the NHS.

Voters were no more misled by the 'Leave' campaign than they were by the 'Remain' campaign. Both sides made claims which were of dubious quality but that is how elections and referendums are run. The opposing camps make all manner of claims about how wonderful life will be if they win and how dreadful it will be if their opponents do; neither tells the whole truth and both ignore any facts which don't support their own position.

It was made very clear by both sides that leaving the European Union would mean leaving both the 'single market' and the 'customs' union', now the remainers ignore this or say that voters just didn't understand the implications. They say that the Brexit now on offer is completely different from what people voted for back in 2016 - what on earth does this mean ? People cast their votes either to stay in the EU or to leave it; they didn't vote for any 'type' of Brexit, they just wanted OUT !

If anyone should be making a fuss, it's the Leavers. Mrs May's withdrawal agreement is a hopeless compromise that potentially leaves the UK tied to, and subservient to, the EU for an indefinite period of time. In a sense, Remainers are correct in their claims about the Brexit on offer being different from what was voted on, but they're fundamentally wrong in the reasons. The difference is that the Brexit on offer is no real Brexit at all, though that is what the liberal elite, who are in charge, wanted all along. Even so, there are still those who won't agree to any Brexit and simply want the UK to stay in the EU, and so our political masters find themselves unable to agree on anything.

It seems clear that the Euro elections on 23rd May are going to be a utterly catastrophic for the Conservative Party and not much better for Labour. The Brexit Party, which has only existed for a few weeks, appears likely to win the votes of around 35% of the electorate and the message this will send to the both major parties will be loud, clear and frightening. Is there the slightest chance that they will hear the message and act on it, or will they just carry on as before, ensconced as they are in their own little bubble worlds and concerned only with their own vested interests ?

The way to make our masters sit up and take real notice is to ensure that as many people as possible vote for the Brexit Party on 23rd May. I will and I hope that millions more will too.

MAY ON HER BIKE - WHO WILL REPLACE HER ?

As the saga of Theresa May drags on interminably, the contenders to succeed her as Prime Minister are mounting in number. The trouble is that none of them is very inspiring.

Boris Johnson is the charismatic choice of many but his flamboyant and frankly often oafish approach renders him problematic. Michael Gove seems to be trying to look like a loyal Party man but surely his vicious attack on Boris at the last such leadership contest has cooked his goose. 

Liam Fox has maintained his position as a committed Brexiteer but has also stayed on in the Cabinet and supported Mrs May whenever it's been necessary. He's a previous failure as a leadership contender so why would he win now ? 

Sajid Javid is desperate to be Prime Minister, which may well scupper his chances. He stood on a joint ticket with Stephen Crabb in the 2016 leadership campaign although the campaign fell at the first hurdle. He does tick lots of boxes for some, but his time in office has not been without it's issues. Rows over Anti-Semitism, Islamophobia, knife crime, immigration and citizenship have all blown up, with Javid seemingly looking to do whatever he thought would get him the most plaudits. Ultimately, his obvious desire for the job, added to this list of high profile problems, my be his undoing.

Jeremy Hunt is, perhaps, the smoothest operator of them all and has kept his head down for the most part, avoiding saying too much about anything. However, he's a Remainer, so would need support from a strong Brexiteer if he's to be in with a real chance. The suspicion otherwise would be that it would be simply Theresa may in a suit and tie leading us to nowhere in particular.

Dominic Raab might be in with a shout, but where's he vanished to in recent weeks ? Since his resignation from the pointless job of Secretary of State for Brexit, he seems to have dropped out of sight - has this been a clever ploy or is he just not that significant a player ? Being fairly unknown might help him although being too quiet might not. He'd certainly need a Remainer or 2 on board in any leadership campaign.

Will Philip Hammond be a candidate ? A committed Remainer, he's been a gloomy and uninspiring Chancellor of the Exchequer, issuing a string of negative comments about the probable effects of Brexit. Along with Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, Hammond has been almost 100% wrong and must be a long shot to convince Brexiteers that he's the man for the top job. 

Andrea Leadsom may well have done for her chances with her ill thought out remarks about motherhood when she was a challenger last time around. As with Michael Gove, she may well have shot herself in the foot though as a strong Brexiteer, perhaps she could be the number 2 on Jeremy Hunt's ticket.

Penny Mordaunt has risen to near the top of the tree for no really discernible reason. She has a history of self-promotion, using Parliament for her own purposes in a speech in 2013 and appearing as a contestant on a television reality show "Splash" in 2014. In 2015, she was identified as being one the very highest claimants for expenses amongst Parliamentarians, and in 2016 she demonstrated a lack of understanding about the workings of the European Union. While she appears to be an unlikely candidate herself, she is a Brexiteer and might, possibly, be another who could be on the Jeremy Hunt ticket.

Amber Rudd is clearly ambitious for the top job but is a fervent Remainer. She is from a highly privileged background  and exudes an appearance of entitlement, rather in the manner of David Cameron and George Osborne. She also has a brother who is a strong supporter of the Labour Party. While she could be the number 2 supporting a Brexiteer candidate, her own chances look remote.

Liz Truss also wants the job but does she inspire the necessary level of confidence ? She seems to me to be someone who says whatever she thinks is necessary with no concern for what it means; she's also one who seems to be frequently unsure of her brief and stumbles over her words. For me, she's a no-hoper.

Esther McVey seems to have the brains and is a committed Brexiteer. She hasn't jumped up and down or made a mockery of herself, as have some, but has maintained a fairly quiet and controlled determination. In contrast to Truss, McVey is a good performer under questioning and generally seems to know her stuff. Her resignation from the Cabinet over Theresa May's proposed Brexit deal certainly won't harm her chances. She's another who could certainly be a number 2 to Jeremy Hunt though perhaps her own chances are better than some might credit.

Which of these offerings could anyone really see representing this country with any strength at the international level ? Boris would probably be the "Peoples' Choice", but does he have support in Parliament ? Perhaps a joint candidature with Amber Rudd might work, but  …….. . Of the rest, only Jeremy Hunt strikes me as being "Prime Ministerial" and, perhaps an eventual joint campaign with Dominic Raab or Esther McVey might succeed.

However the cake is cut, they're an uninspiring bunch. Of course, there are other potential contenders and the eventual winner might appear from some previously unconsidered dark corner of the Party. What is certain is that whoever comes on top has an almighty job to do. They have to reunite the Conservative Party, bring Brexit about as quickly as possible - deal, no-deal, whatever - and stave off the threats from both Nigel Farage's Brexit Party and the Marxist extremism of Jeremy Corbyn's mob. After that, it will be all about keeping the United Kingdom together in the face of more calls for Scottish independence, and winning the next general election. 

Why would anyone actually want the job ??

COME ON YOU SPURS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

As someone who's been supporting Tottenham Hotspur since their 'Glory, Glory Days' of the early 1960s, it has been a rollercoaster ride filled with more disappointment than jubilation. Often getting close to major success but rarely actually achieving it, even more so over the last 10 or so years.

Their journey through this season's Champions' League has been problematic. They squeezed through the group stage by the skin of their teeth, and beat Manchester City in dramatic fashion in the quarter final. Last night in Amsterdam, they seemed dead and buried at half-time in the second leg of their semi-final, 0-3 on aggregate and heading home. Then everything changed.

Following the example of Liverpool the night before, they came back from the dead, but in even more incredible style. Liverpool had a whole 90 minutes in which to overcome a 3-goal deficit, Tottenham had but 45; Liverpool were playing in front of their fanatical home supporters, Tottenham away from home in a hostile Amsterdam. As with Liverpool, a single goal from the opposition would have rendered their task virtually impossible but ………… .

Tottenham kept Ajax out and scored 3 times, all courtesy of Lucas Moura who isn't even a regular starter in the team. With seconds to go to the final whistle, Ajax were still ahead and on course for the final, but Moura's 3rd goal, scored 6 minutes into added time (of which only 5 minutes was originally signalled) changed all that. The 'away goals' rule kicked in and Tottenham were through to the Final.

Tottenham's only previous foray as far as the semi-final of European football's premier competition was in 1961/2 when they lost on aggregate to the eventual winners Benfica of Portugal after 2 dubious penalty decisions. Since then, they have only managed to qualify to play with the elite on a handful of occasions, once under Harry Redknapp and, now, 3 times under the inspiring management of Mauricio Pochettino. With nothing like the resources available to other top European sides, Pochettino has achieved what seemed impossible and guided his side to the Final. His emotional reaction to the result was there for all to see - it meant the world to him.

In Madrid on 1st June, Pochettino's Tottenham will face Jurgen Klopp's Liverpool for the ultimate prize. Liverpool are the undoubted favourites but after the events of the last 2 nights, anything could happen. Win or lose, Tottenham and Pochettino have achieved something special, something which no one truly believed possible. Should they come away from Madrid with the trophy, it will be one of the greatest sporting triumphs ever.

COME ON YOU SPURS !!!!!!

POLITICAL HYPOCRISY ON A GRAND SCALE

If anyone needs evidence of the hypocrisy and duplicity of our current crop of politicians they need only consider their use of language.

In 2016 we had a referendum which all agreed would be binding on the government. In the event, the government received a surprise in that it got the 'wrong' result, but still it accepted that it had to abide by that outcome, as did the opposition parties. Ever since, those who didn't like the result have sought to reverse it.

There have been claims that the electorate were misled although the leaflets distributed by the Remain side were absolutely clear with regard to what leaving the European Union would mean. To counter this argument, Remainers changed their tack slightly to say that those who voted to leave didn't fully understand the issues, a clear calumny. They then moved on to start suggesting that there should be a 'Peoples' Vote' to determine whether any deal agreed with the EU was acceptable.

Why 'Peoples' Vote' ? We had a referendum and the people gave their verdict. Was not the referendum a 'Peoples' Vote' ? What we have is a bunch of anti-democrats, led by the arch anti-democrats of the laughably named Liberal Democratic Party, demanding a second referendum because they didn't like the answer given by the first. This has been standard practice in the EU for many years, with second and third referendums being conducted whenever member states got the 'wrong' answer from their electorates first, or even second, time around. This is also what the liberal elite expect to happen until they get the result that they wanted in the first place.

To call for a second referendum but dress it up in 1984 Newspeak as a 'Peoples' Vote' is nothing short of political fraud. It actually exposes our modern political cronies as the bunch of crooks that they are, people who will never call a spade a spade, never answer a question honestly and will use every imaginable contrivance in order to con the public into voting for them, with absolutely no concern for honesty, integrity, sincerity, or the democracy they all claim to believe in.

The entire political class in this country is riddled with corruption and is mostly unfit for office. What are we going to do about it ?

TORIES FACE OBLIVION - MAY SOLDIERS ON.

The absolute drubbing handed out to the Conservatives in last week's local elections must surely send a message to their senior management - time is up.

It's very clear that the voting public have had more than enough of both major parties with the Conservatives losing over 1,300 seats while Labour also lost seats, rather than gaining the hundreds which John McDonnell had predicted. The Liberal Democrats (a laughable name) may be celebrating their apparent 'victory' in winning 700 seats but they started from such an exceptionally low base and were no more than recipients of votes from those protesting against both Conservative and Labour incompetence at the national level. Effectively, these elections had nothing to do with local issues and were all about the failings of the two senior parties at Westminster.

The responses from Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn have been pathetic. They seem to believe that carrying on as before, supposedly seeking some sort of cross-party consensus on Brexit, is the answer. Mrs May is moving ever closer to agreeing to Labour's demands for a 'customs' union' and close alignment with the European Union, while Labour will, no doubt, drop their demand for another referendum; expect an announcement before the end of the week. The result will be a non-Brexit Brexit which will satisfy no one other than those who cobble it together.

There is no doubt that Theresa May is the least competent Prime Minister for many years. Gordon Brown was poor and Jim Callaghan wasn't up to the job, but we have to go back to at least Alec Douglas-Home or Anthony Eden to find a PM who was so unsuited to the position. Not only has this obstinate and useless woman failed, she has failed so catastrophically that future generations may well refer to "doing a May" as a euphemism for making a real mess of things. Her claims of having reached an agreement with the EU will go down in history alongside those of poor Neville Chamberlain and his "paper which bears his name" agreement with Herr Hitler.

May's record is one of unmitigated failure. From the outset, her virtual coronation as David Cameron's successor in 2016, she has proved to be incapable of leading her party or her country. It took her until March 2017, 9 months after the referendum, to get around to formally beginning the process of the UK's exit from the European Union. Then, for no reason other than that opinion polls suggested the Conservatives were well ahead and could potentially achieve an increased majority in parliament, she called a general election for June of that year but which she managed so catastrophically as to ensure that her party not only didn't gain seats but actually lost the slim majority which it had previously enjoyed. Her only means of staying in power was to place her government in the hands of the Democratic Unionists from Northern Ireland, which led directly to her next failure.

May entered into 'negotiations' with the European Union from a wholly wrong direction. Instead of telling the EU what she was prepared to do, she asked what they would accept. Unsurprisingly, having set all of the rules, the EU's representatives then set about making Brexit as difficult as possible. Six months of 'negotiation' resulted in the insanity of an agreement, purely so that things could proceed to the next stage, which neither many members of her own party nor of her government's supporters, the DUP could ever accept. The 'Irish Backstop' was a mechanism invented by the EU, in collaboration with the government of the Irish Republic, specifically designed to prevent any meaningful Brexit from ever occurring, and yet May signed up to it.

Over the next year, the 'Irish Backstop' became the main talking point and Brexit became dependent upon finding a way out of this appalling mistake. May simply carried on regardless, reaching a supposed 'withdrawal agreement' with the EU and then stubbornly insisting that this was the only way forward. Ultimately, Parliament rejected not only her deal but also every other option put forward, except, of course, that 'no deal' was unacceptable. May lost control of her Cabinet, with the traditional collective responsibility shot to pieces, of her government and of parliament. She no longer has any authority at Westminster and the local election results send a clear message that Conservative voters have no faith in her, or her government, either. Incredibly, she has continued to ignore calls for her to resign, simply saying that she will go once the first stage of the Brexit process has been concluded, be that next week, next year or never.

May initially said that she would deliver Brexit on 29th March 2019, and that no deal was better than a bad deal. What she's actually done is to agree an EU determined withdrawal agreement which included the 'Irish Backstop', something which was never going to be acceptable to Brexiteers. She has presided over a complete breakdown of collective responsibility within her cabinet and government, a complete loss of authority in parliament and a near disintegration of her party in the country. Despite the Labour Party having veered dramatically to the left under the leadership of hard-left Marxists, she has failed to capitalise, as has the Labour leadership on May's catastrophic leadership of both her party and country, specifically because of its own neo-Marxist unelectability.  When, or even if, Brexit happens is in the lap of the Gods, 29th March having long since receded into the past and new dates being chucked around like confetti.

To add to May's record of failure, the latest example is truly bizarre. The saga of the Huawei leak is something which even seasoned mystery writers would have trouble dreaming up. A leak of information, not subsequently deemed to be of any real significance, resulted in a great furore stirred up by Mrs May's adherents and a 'leak inquiry' overseen by the Cabinet Secretary. Historically, such investigations rarely, if ever, produce anything but hot air but, on this occasion, a culprit was identified within no time at all. Secretary of State for Defence, Gavin Williamson, was named and sacked although he has vehemently denied any responsibility; Mrs May and her mates have subsequently refused to make their claimed evidence public and have refused to allow the police, or anyone else, to re-examine the matter. It all smacks of lies, convenience, duplicity and cover-up; in any normal case, Mr Williamson would be allowed the opportunity to defend himself against what he says are fallacious accusations but not, it seems, in Mrs May's world.

Where is all this going to end ? Last Thursday, I spoiled my ballot paper as did, reportedly, at least many tens of thousands of other voters, exasperated by the utter incompetence and duplicity of politicians of all parties and levels. If, or when, we are subjected to elections for the European Union's ridiculous parliament, scheduled for 23rd May, I shall be voting for the Brexit Party which seems likely to garner a large, probably the largest, percentage, of the total votes cast. Thus far, the Conservatives have failed to launch a campaign for these elections, Mrs May no doubt believing that her party is doomed to a monumentally catastrophic defeat whatever they do; so inaction, which seems to be her forté, is seen as being preferable to making a pointless effort for which she could be criticised even more.

As if to add to the turmoil, pretenders to the throne are lining up for the inevitable leadership election. Some of the potential candidates are well known - Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, Sajid Javid, Jeremy Hunt - others are virtually unknown - Rory Stewart, Dominic Raab, Matt Hancock. Frankly, none looks like anything more than yet another of the party hacks produced by the Conservative Party over the years; certainly, none looks like a Prime Minister in waiting; in the absence of a genuinely talented and charismatic new leader, the Conservative Party is surely doomed to oblivion.

That leaves us with Jeremy Corbyn and his Marxist, terrorist friends to inherit the earth. What a glorious prospect.

YET MORE CASH FOR MADELEINE McCANN.

The Metropolitan Police have already spent some £11.75m on their investigation, 'Operation Grange', into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann, and have now asked for yet more cash; they say that they are pursuing "active lines of inquiries" which, they claim, "the public would expect us to see ... through".

Really ? This child went missing 12 years ago while in the supposed care of her parents and no trace of her has been found since. What "active lines of inquiries" the police are now pursuing hasn't been explained but one suspects that this is a smokescreen designed simply to justify the continued expenditure, rather than telling the family that there's nothing more to be done. One also wonders whether there will ever be a line drawn under this affair and the investigation formally closed.

Madeleine is almost certainly dead and it is highly unlikely that the truth of what happened to her will ever be revealed. It's been deemed inappropriate to lay any blame at the door of the parents who, at the very least, were guilty of neglecting their children while enjoying socialising with friends; whether their guilt extends any further, we will, in all probability, never know. Instead, a low key investigation continues, more because of a reluctance on the part of the authorities to admit that they've failed and that the investigation must end, than for any other reason.

Isn't it amazing that seemingly endless bundles of cash can be produced for something so fruitless, when more worthy causes go begging. As a member of the public, I see no purpose in continuing this pointless investigation and I wonder who are "the public" whom Cressida Dick believes want the waste of resources to be continued. Surely she has far more urgent and immediate matters on which to commit scarce resources than an incident which happened in a country many miles away, many years ago.

Postscript :
Very conveniently, just as the Metropolitan Police have requested £300.000 to allow them to continue investigating for another 12 months, there are reports of a new suspect for the presumed abduction. Apparently, some "foreign paedophile" is now in the frame although why it's taken 12 years to get to this 'discovery' is something of a mystery. It must also be highly unlikely that another year and more money will produce any result.

This is nothing but chucking good money after bad. 

IS WILLIAMSON A LEAKER OR WAS HE FRAMED ?

Well, Well, Well !! A 'Leak Inquiry' which has actually produces a result, there's a novelty, or is it just a convenient fudge ?

The Prime Minister has decided, on evidence produced by her chief advisor Mark Sedwill, that the recent leak of information from the National Security Council on the matter of Chinese telecoms company Huawei was down to Gavin Williamson, the then Secretary of State for Defence. Following a meeting with the PM, Mr Williamson was sacked, having refused to resign.

On the one hand, Theresa May, remarkably still the Prime Minister, appears to be certain that Mr Williamson is the guilty party; Williamson has vehemently denied that he had any involvement in the leak and that he has been the victim of a vendetta. It's been said that Mark Sedwill has had a longstanding dislike of Williamson and some of his parliamentary colleagues have also expressed a dislike for him. It seems that his departure from the Cabinet will not produce any great sadness. From Mrs May's perspective, she has achieved a much needed success, rooting out the perpetrator of a leak and acting decisively to rid the government of the offender.

However, Mr Williamson's protestations of innocence may yet result in more trouble for the Prime Minister. Williamson remains a Member of Parliament and seems to have the support of his constituency party. Although the matter of divulging details of discussions in the NSC is a criminal offence, no police investigation has yet been initiated; it seems likely that whatever evidence has been used as the basis of the decision to lay the blame on Mr Williamson, it is largely circumstantial and would not allow for a successful criminal prosecution. 

Regardless of the result of the Cabinet Office inquiry and given that the alleged offence is criminal, a police investigation must surely now be established anyway; is not Mr Williamson entitled to a full and vigorous investigation of his alleged offence in order to have an opportunity to prove his innocence ? Of course, having already made a decision and acted upon it, the last thing that Mrs May wants is for anyone to investigate further and potentially prove her to have been wrong, so a police investigation seems unlikely and Mr Williamson will remain in political purgatory.

That this is wholly wrong is obvious. If Mr Williamson is guilty as charged then he should face the full weight of the law; if he is innocent as he claims, he should be allowed to prove this in court. The problem is that discovering that Mr Williamson has been wrongly charged and sentenced in a kangaroo court set up by his enemies would be the final nail in the already battered career of Mrs May. 

Unless he can get someone else to admit to being the wrongdoer, Mr Williamson's goose seems to be well and truly cooked.