The Party which gets my votes does not yet exist.

All three Political Parties, Tory, Labour and the SNP have all proven themselves absolutely against following the basic, easily-understood instruction given them by 17.4 million British People. We told them, in a ballot which was authorised by that same Parliament, that we wanted to Leave; and what do we get in return?

From Labour, an agonised indecision, fuelled by the plain fact that that most Labour MPs are Remainers, and a vast percentage of Labour voters want to Leave. Labour loves the EU for many reasons, too many to elaborate on within these paragraphs. Labour loves the ‘Socialist-Authoritarian’ manner in which Regulations are handed down from on high within the Commission, and also loves how the voting rights of nations have been gerrymandered by the Lisbon Treaty through Qualified Majority Voting.

From the Tories, a straight split between those who understand that, despite a possible short-term upheaval in trading relations between the UK and the Continent of Europe, the best way possible is just to get out, and trade on GATT terms with both the EU and the World, and the compromisers, who wish us, as a nation, to be bound by steely ropes, listed within Withdrawal Agreement, which would prove to be unbreakable in terms of having to abide by EU Regulations for as long as the EU so desired.

The Scottish National Party is determined to stay within the EU, and votes accordingly. They see the split and break-off of the United Kingdom as a barrier to their wished-for dream of Independence for Scotland, as they accept that, if given the chance of an Independence Referendum, and a diminishing chance of winning that Vote, they would then have to join the very back of the queue to rejoin their beloved comfort blanket which is the EU.

Readers will note that I do not include the Lib-Dims, or the Greens, as they are, increasingly, irrelevant in these times.

So, which Party to vote for? In terms of Europe; or in terms more importantly, in terms of policies which benefit the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland?

I would vote for a Party which espouses:-

• Accepting the Instruction, received in the 2016 Referendum, and proceeding to enact Legislation to sever all Treaty ties with the EU.
• An immediate repeal of all Hate Speech law, removing the atrocious legal barriers which make the accused having to prove his innocence before the law, instead of the other way around. Removing the atrocious ideals of having to accommodate an accusation of having ‘offended someone’, without that someone have to literally prove that ‘offence’ had been taken.
• A similar repeal of ALL GENDER legislation, and an acceptance that there are only two genders, Male and Female, and anyone who claims otherwise is ignored; 100%.
• An updated Treason Law, which would take action by removal of passport and citizenship rights, against anyone who campaigns for a proscribed group, supports by actions such as moving to an area and supporting a terrorist organisation or encouraging acts of violence against British Citizens; anywhere in the world.
• Accompanying the amendments to the Treason Laws would be the reintroduction of Capital Punishment. Crimes which would merit the Death Penalty would be Murder, any murder, not just Police Officers or members of British Armed Forces, Treasonous Activity, the sale and supply of Listed Drugs and other proscribed substances. Allied to the reintroduction of Capital Punishment would be a statutory removal from a Trial of any proposed Juror who will not swear, on oath, that he or she would support the Death Penalty; if the accused was found guilty.
• An immediate repeal of the Climate Change Act (CCA), which would save this Nation some £18 billions over the next ten years.
• Allied to the afore-mentioned CCA, a removal of all subsidies for wind turbines, solar panels; allied to a new drive to build and commission our own Nuclear Power stations, gas-fired CCGT stations, and the reintroduction of coal-fired power stations.
• An Amendment to the International Development Act 2015, removing the specified target of 0.7% of GDP, and this to be replaced by a maximum of £1 billion, which shall be retained and disbursed by the DFiD only for true emergency aid; such as relief after earthquakes or hurricanes.
• The balance of the specified DFiD spend to be  given, in totality, to improving our Defence Forces. Services Recruitment outsourcing to be cancelled immediately, and revised, old-fashioned face-to-face interviews in recruiting offices be renewed. Proven  military technologies must be spent within the United Kingdom excepting already proven large-spend items; such as aircraft, and all spends must be on an open tender, which must state that all overspends will not be billed to the UK Taxpayer.
• The immediate cancellation of all taxpayer-funded payments and subsidies to Charities.
• The cancellation of all out-sourcing of Government activities, the re-introduction of Government-funded activities such as Forensic Laboratories,
• The absolute removal of all taxpayer-funded Quasi Autonomous  Non-Governmental Organisations (QUANGOs); with the exceptions of the Nuclear Power Authority, the Arts Council and the Food Standards Agency.
• The immediate withdrawal of all Inheritance Tax legislation, this being paid for by the savings accrued from the removal of all QUANGO costs.

The afore-mentioned list is, as the old saying goes; a start.

The probability of such a Party emerging into the political morass which is today’s Britain? It would indeed be a miracle, but, unfortunately, the age of miracles is long past: if it ever existed in reality!

Transgender: Paradise or Paradox?

I rarely write or comment upon any sport. I have absolutely no interest in following any so–called competitive sport, probably because I just cannot understand the tribal urge to support one team, or one person, in trials of alleged sporting prowess. If the world’s ruling sports bodies followed my ideal, every known and even unknown drug would immediately be legalised, but the sport concerned would have to be renamed “The (Add Pharmaceutical Company name here: Merck. Roche, Glaxo, etc.) 100 metre championship’, for example, to reflect the truth. That truth being that, in virtually every competitive sport on this planet, ordinary competitors are being outclassed, no matter how high their training and athletic prowess is, by others whose actions are being enhanced by artifice, by drugs, and by manipulation.

But I do not come today to write, or condemn, or even to justify the performances which are illegally enhanced by competitors using the methods of blood-doping, or of use of medication for an alleged allergy; and in doing so by-pass the strict doping regulations which ruling bodies state are being rigorously enforced. I write instead of the farce which is underway whereby men, fully grown and mature athletes, are able to compete, legally, against those of a vastly inferior stature, by virtue of a simple statement that they are claiming to be “Transgender’; and allegedly ‘Transitioning’ to another gender. They are also being aided by statements from very senior ruling sports bodies that, under the rules, if they confirm that they are, and have been, in receipt of testosterone treatment, for nine months; they are legally able to compete, on level terms, with female athletic competitors. The level of testosterone which has been fixed as the measured acceptable level, for transgender competitors is 270 (ng/dL).

There are, however, many things besides testosterone which build a human body. Men, by virtue of their physiological make-up, have broader chests, larger hearts and lungs, longer limbs, better muscles powering those limbs, and many, many more items which build world-class male athletes. But it is testosterone, during and after puberty, which is the driving force behind the physical difference between men and women. The statistics state categorically that if a ‘Trans’ athlete abides by the rules, and takes treatments which reduce his/her/its testosterone levels to the agreed levels,  they still have the physiological traits given them by nature, and, by virtue of the ‘rules’, they will have an unbeatable advantage in weight, power, ability and agility over their female opponents.

So, where we once had a Paula Radcliffe, long-distance and marathon specialist supreme; we could now see a low achieving man, built and fashioned by his genes and natural testosterone input, challenge a similar woman to Radcliffe on the grounds that he is now a ‘trans’ athlete, and beating her all hands down, on the sheer basis that, to all purposes, he is still a man, but acting under literally false pretences.

Drugs, I can perhaps understand, but politically-correct placing of biological men into women’s events on the basis that they have achieved a purely artificial testosterone level in order to compete? Garbage! Check out the photo at the top of the linked page. Do you see three women on the podium? Nope, you see two slim-hipped, short stature women as runners-up: and the Winner, in every respect, is still a Man!