Open letter to Head of MET Dame Cressida Dick [revised 12/10/2021]

Some say that you got your job as a bit of blatant window dressing? You have said publicly recently regarding Sarah Everard’s murder that you are ‘Sorry’ and ‘Lessons will be Learnt’? Ambiguous, misleading, weasel words when you don’t explain WHAT you are Sorry for, nor WHAT Lessons will be Learnt?

Wayne Couzens, a serving Met armed police officer, with an all-areas pass to the Commons, committed the heinous crimes of kidnap, rape, and murder of 33-year-old marketing executive Sarah Everard and trash burning his victim’s body, yet he was not dismissed, so remained in your force and was still paid long after he had admitted this criminality. He was recruited and passed ‘clearly inadequate’ vetting checks with no follow-up, as he had no criminal convictions or cautions, and that despite his reputation in previous forces as a sexual bad egg [nicknamed ‘the rapist’ by colleagues in the Civil Nuclear Constabulary because of his inappropriate behaviour around women]. He used to work at his father’s garage in Dover before joining the Kent Special Constabulary at some point after 2002, and a colleague in that year has spoken of ‘his attraction to brutal sexual pornography’. He used prostitutes and had a fake dating profile despite being married with two children. In 2018, it has been claimed that he was reported to bosses for slapping a female police officer’s bottom at Bromley police station but it appears no action was taken; and also, while at Bromley, it is alleged he became the subject of gossip for only stopping female motorists – before taking their details so he could watch their homes – and parking outside schools to leer at mothers and sixth formers.

Couzens had previously committed flashing sexual offences – the early sign of a carnal marauder

On February 28, just 72 hours before Miss Everard’s murder, two McDonald’s staff told police they were flashed by a male motorist at a branch in Swanley, Kent. Officers are then believed to have identified Couzens’ car via CCTV of his number plate. However, officers did not realise the suspect was their own officer until afterwards. He previously had exposed himself (naked from the waist down) on February 7 and again on February 27 (again officers are believed to have identified Couzens’ car via CCTV of his number plate).

Furthermore, Couzens’ car number plate was linked to a 2015 alleged indecent exposure in Kent, though Couzens was not named as the suspect, but the vehicle involved was identified and that information would have been enough to establish that Couzens was the owner. Met Police blamed the Kent force for the missing link, claiming ‘Kent Police investigated this allegation and decided to take no further action’ – the record of this allegation and outcome may not have been found during the Met vetting checks. Indeed more recently he was suspected of flashing two women at McDonald’s three days before his vile escapade [the incident had been reported to police, who identified Couzens’ car via CCTV] – and though police knew that one ‘Wayne Couzens’ was accused of flashing they apparently failed to identify him as a Met officer until later, so he was never apprehended – that inexplicable failure, which smacks of protectionism by fellow officers, as very few people share the killer’s name (meaning a basic investigation would have identified the Diplomatic Protection Officer as the suspect), whence he could have been exposed as a sexual predator and suspended (involving being put on restricted duties, meaning he had to hand in his warrant card and couldn’t have any contact with the public), before he went on to kidnap, rape and strangle Sarah, but that ‘failure to investigate’ fiasco allowed him on the evening of 3 March 2021 to fulfil his sick fantasy and proceed with his premeditated plan to seek out on the dark streets of South London and fatally attack any innocent lone woman stranger he came across. There were multiple missed chances to expose Couzens as a threat to women. That would include the fact that twisted killer officer Wayne Couzens ‘showed off a prostitute at a Met Police party’ and referred to her as his bit of “brass” at a private do at the Hilton in Maidstone, Kent – the former Met Police officer was said to be open with colleagues about using prostitutes. In addition, on another occasion a woman is alleged to have turned up at his London police station asking for money, and the married dad-of-two was then ‘called back from patrol’ so he could go to a cashpoint with her and he admitted she was also a prostitute – the woman refused to leave until she’d spoken to Couzens. A source said Couzens was “always saying weird things about sex” and gave several colleagues “the creeps” – it “beggars belief” if “not actually criminal” that he was protected by colleagues and no-one saw fit to raise either of the two escort incidents with superiors or how your force failed to identify Couzens as a predatory risk.

Sarah Everard’s ‘false arrest and murder’ has corroded trust in the police in general and brought ‘shame’ on your force’ – women’s confidence in the police has been shattered, hasn’t it?

Why was Wayne Couzens not also charged with the false arrest used in the abduction – because that would put the police in disrepute? Who decided that?

The burden to stay safe has repugnantly been delegated to women themselves (wives, partners, sister’s, daughters, and female friends) as demonstrated by the Met Police new ‘ridiculous’ derisory guidance telling women to ‘wave down a bus’, if they don’t trust a male officer! What distrust people will now have where they have to protect themselves FROM the police in that manner, eh?

Reportedly more than 750 of your officers and staff have faced sexual misconduct claims since 2010 – just 83 sacked though! Well before Wayne Couzens, staggeringly some 27 of your officers were CONVICTED of sex crimes in the past 5 years, including one who was jailed 26 months for sending highly sexualised messages to what he thought was a 13-year-old girl? Another officer was sent down for 22 months for 3 counts of possession of indecent child images and three of outraging public decency. Five have even carried out sex offences while ON DUTY since 2010 and unbelievably one was recruited last year despite a conviction for INDECENT EXPOSURE? Sex offences included rape, possession of indecent child images, and voyeurism, while 150 serving officers have convictions for OTHER offences ranging from assault to drugs – when it’s never appropriate for a force to employ an officer with a criminal record, is it?

Yet another serving Met police officer (now suspended), from the same Diplomatic Protection Command as Couzens, has been charged on 3 October with rape by Hertfordshire Constabulary when off-duty on 4 September 2020 in St Albans.

Moreover, in the months before Couzens’ criminal actions he exchanged WhatsApp group misogynistic, racist and homophobic texts for 8 months in 2019 with his police colleagues, as found on his phone, so another 16 of your officers and others are now being probed and are ones who are ‘belatedly’ facing a criminal investigation for sending grossly offensive material (why are some still on duty?). However, you knew all about that of course as a superintendent senior officer ‘whistle blower’ warned you in March about the 2019 WhatsApp sick vulgar sexist texts sent by your officers, that amply demonstrated the flourishing sexist culture environment at the Met, though you didn’t respond. Nevertheless, action WAS taken – but NOT against the culprits but AGAINST the female informant who was victimised and lost her job, so took your force to an industrial tribunal and won her case for compensation DISGUSTING. In typical police cover-up fashion, a panel had found the WhatsApp group vile participants behaviour to be ‘distasteful’ but NOT amounting to MISCONDUCT – but the industrial tribunal decided differently and ruled the messages were ‘sexualised, derogatory towards women, offensive, and completely inappropriate for ANY workplace’!

Many months ago, your force the MET was exposed by senior officers as being a hotbed of unchecked widespread and rife toxic sexism and misogyny, so how come you didn’t know about it nor take appropriate action to deal with what amounts to institutional misogyny, eh? You don’t seem to get the seriousness of the situation you have presided over?

Furthermore, on 13 March 2021, your male police officers were seen ‘grabbing and manhandling’ peaceful women who were then handcuffed and removed from crowds at a vigil for Sarah Everard in south London (while officers had a responsibility to enforce Covid-19 restrictions at the rally it was in the public’s view a response at times neither appropriate nor proportionate – though a police watchdog ‘whitewash’ found they had acted “appropriately”).

[During the vigil held in memory of Sarah Everard the ‘Reclaim The Streets’ group had planned to hold a peaceful vigil on Clapham Common in honour of Everard, on a Saturday evening but ultimately cancelled those plans after failing to engage the London Met Police in talks about how best to hold the event – however, despite the change of plans, hundreds still descended on Clapham Common in a show of female solidarity]

Rotten apple Wayne Couzens was surrounded by likeminded sexism fellow officers who did not investigate his foulness and he was disgracefully protected by your rotten barrel institution

All these dreadful things at the MET, Britain’s largest police force with 43,000 officers [Police Officers: 32,373; Special Constables: 1,840; Police Community Support Officers: 1,254; Designated Detention Officers: 614; Police Staff: 9,814], happened on YOUR watch, but YOU don’t seem to accept ACCOUNTABILITY, so although Couzens is solely responsible for Sarah Everard’s murder, WHO is accountable for your organisation’s many many failings, that now make it not fit for purpose, eh?

You have belatedly now announced an independent review into the “standards” and “culture” of the Metropolitan Police when you say “Our leadership, our processes, our systems, our people, our training, everything will be looked at. This will be a fully transparent report, it will respond to me, but will, of course, make recommendations for changes, I’m sure, and those will be public.” but why did you wait and not do so at the appropriate time, say a year ago, when it would have saved Sarah Everard from brutal murder by Wayne Couzens?

Your devious plan to protect your management inaction by holding an ‘independent review’ in secret and only disclosing to the public ‘change recommendations’, has been scuppered by Home Secretary Priti Patel’s decision to launch an independent government inquiry into the Mets (your) failures after the Couzens scandal [“unimaginable failures” allowed Wayne Couzens to keep his job], hasn’t it? She like the general public is aghast that indeed he was ever was allowed to join as a Met police officer and remained one, before raping and killing Sarah Everard (the worst moment in the Metropolitan Police’s 192-year history?) – it will also investigate the missed opportunities you had to identify his predatory behaviour, and the ‘boys club’ culture at Scotland Yard that protected him from exposure. Secondly, it will cover changes that you needed to have implement in vetting practices, professional standards, discipline and workplace behaviour [currently it will be non-statutory, so unless that changes it will NOT have powers to compel witnesses to attend hearings or get full access to documents, as there are genuine fears it could be obstructed by Scotland Yard no less, and monster Couzens himself could obtain the right to appear and even gain full access to sensitive detail linked evidence. [Patel also asks “what’s going wrong in policing in London” where all the key statistics on crime and misconduct were “going in the wrong direction” (it has to be said under your personal management for over 5 years since 2017)

The Telegraph newspaper’s latest exposé of your force’s catalogue of failings and ‘institutional rot’ that has corrupted the Metropolitan Police, including ‘ineffective’ and ‘bullying’ management, is outlined by a number of your team former-detectives from CAIT (Child Abuse Investigation Team) covering SE London, one of Scotland yard’s most sensitive units, who claim the complaints process is broken, potentially ‘putting children at risk’, amidst allegations that as well as instructions to carry-out ‘unlawful’ acts [when refusal to comply led to disciplinary proceedings), there were orders from superiors (which were covered-up), to arrest and caution people over abuse offences they were NOT believed to have committed and for which there was no evidence, solely in order to boost the recorded ‘clear-up rate’ – and officers were too afraid to raise concerns about their colleagues because of a ‘culture of protection’ in the Met – predictably your force subsequently determined that certain allegations were ‘not supported by evidence’.

Based on their disturbing reports, in defence either you must claim that YOU employed INCOMPETENT detectives OR these are bare-faced LIARS – WHICH IS IT MADAM?

It was Davison’s ‘own personal’ “nothing to worry about mate” Plymouth killing spree – but now that private GRIEF has been superseded by public ANGER, who else should be held ‘accountable’ for the deaths?

There is one thing abundantly  clear about the dreadful murders carried out in just some six minutes by Plymouth born gun-fanatic Jake Davison in his own residential area on the evening of Thursday 12 August 2021 and that is he should never have been legally in possession of a gun, isn’t it?

Be of no doubt as well that HE alone is solely responsible for the massacre killings of his own mother Maxine Davidson(who bizarrely he blamed for his lack of success with women and himself being a virgin), and four other innocent strangers in the street [toy pram pushing 3 year old girl Sophie Martyn, her dad Lee Martyn, and another two passers-by, Kate Shepherd, and huskies dog walker Stephen Washington, plus 2 more shot and seriously injured, Michelle Parsonage and son Ben, before like the coward he was, he shot himself dead, but there are outsiders who should be also held accountable – like the Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Police, Shaun Sawyer, and his financially well rewarded team of police officers who had accepted responsibility for issuing firearm certificates, requiring them to ensure none fell into the wrong hands – when in the case of Davison one certainly DID, so these individuals utterly failed to adequately perform their duty – with 5 victims dead as a consequence! Those policemen should not however be confused with the very brave unarmed and armed cops who rushed to the scene in what proved to be a futile attempt to stop those killings.

[Davison has been described as being a member of the Incel (short for involuntary celibate) community, a fatalistic and misogynistic (hatred or contempt for women or girls – it is a way of keeping women at a lower status than men) with a world view that your position in life cannot change. So although this attack is currently being treated by detectives as a domestic incident, nevertheless early indications are that it was in fact a terror attack (you see Incel definitely can be an ideology for the purposes of terrorism) – indeed there are 10,000 people with women-hating incel views like Davison in the country, and already Jake Davison’s atrocity was praised in extreme misogynistic message boards and the Plymouth gunman was hailed as a ‘saint’ by like-minded misogynists in chat rooms and forums dedicated to the extreme incel subculture. Some users said Jake Davison’s rampage, marked the beginning of a new ‘season’ of attacks by men consumed by a hatred of women

In the first place, mass shooter Davison actually had NO personal RIGHT to own or have a gun – the UK is not America so NOBODY here has the same constitutional right to bear arms. A member of the public gun licence certificate should ONLY be granted by UK Police to an applicant:

  1. who poses NO threat to public safety
  2. who has good reason for owning a gun

As events have shown, NEITHER of these conditions and constraints could have been applied to this crazed gunman

  • Davison had been licensed to own a firearm since 2018, but hindsight has amply demonstrated that he WAS a threat to public safety and the peace, but we will only later find out why that wasn’t identified as such by those responsible (even just by his weird visual appearance). Exactly how did he prove otherwise to the police [not least after having had his licence delaying revoked last December for an assault incident some three months earlier? (but they the police themselves incomprehensibly returned his weapon a month before his murderous rampage) and despite it having been identified also by the police that he in fact had anger management issues, as well as there being ample evidence of legitimate concerns about the state of his mental health!). It’s already self-evident from his running amok that loner Davison is exactly the sort of person that should have been on an establishment ‘watch list’ and certainly NOT somebody on a Police ‘gun-holders list’
  • What ‘possible’ valid reason could a 22-year-old trainee crane operator living in a council cul-de-sac in middle of the small Keyham community area of Plymouth city, have to own a shotgun (which if licensed can indeed be lawfully be used for toff sports such as clay-pigeon shooting)– let alone the devastating pump-action shotgun (a repeated shots killing machine) deployed by the maniac in this slaughter, eh?

    Gun licence applicant background checks are very much required in this country so what checks were actually carried-out by the police and what follow-up resulted? Any check with anyone who had known him since his teenage days would have reported that he was a dangerous character. It’s noted also that apparently the police have had altercations with Davison over the years, and it also turns out that the social media platform Reddit actually suspended his account in violation of Reddit’s Terms of Service, on the Wednesday, the day before the shootings, after he sexually harassed a 16-year-old girl (five days after the American girl reported him to moderators).

He had also posted misogynist and homophobic views on various internet forums whilst utilising Reddit to openly express hostility and resentment towards his mother, Maxine, who had repeatedly attempted to personally get, and persuade him to receive, treatment for purported mental health issues. His channel was subscribed to an account named IncelTV, and other clips of his videos contained further references to – and using terminology of – such Incel community; in one discussing “missing out on a teenage romance” and refers to “Chads“, saying further that: “I’m not advocating this, but if I have to I might even try and use drugs to make up for it, maybe cocaine fuelled sex or something, maybe that can make up for that missed teenage experience.” and “The reality is, love is for the young, and I know I’m still somewhat young and I hope I can make up for it, but I have a feeling like I missed that boat and it’s never coming back

[Note: a chad is a derogatory name given to attractive men who are sexually successful with women]

Reportedly, five years ago in 2016 outside a Tesco less than a mile distant from his killing field, Davison in an unprovoked assault savagely attacked one Scott Hobbs and his pregnant partner. However, the police rather than properly recording it as a serious assault (which would or should have impacted his firearm certificate application), they simply let him off with a mere caution despite the injured man having to be taken to hospital (the police didn’t take the issue seriously and unbelievably said Davison was ‘nothing to worry about’) – later Davison (who at the time did NOT hold a firearm license) also threatened to use a gun on Hobbs as part of a subsequently harassment campaign, eh?

How comes the police were always out of the loop on such significant matters, and so deemed Davison a licensed firearms holder, a safe bet to own and use a powerful weapon?

There are two main categories of guns are people allowed to own – firearms and shotguns.

  1. A firearm is defined in the Firearms Act 1968 as any weapon “from which a shot, bullet or other missile… can be discharged”.
  2. A shotgun is a type of gun intended to fire a large number of small pellets rather than a single lead bullet or slug.

It is more difficult to get a licence for firearms than for shotguns, because weapons that fire bullets must ONLY be used for specific purposes in specific places. These would include deer stalking or sports shooting on an approved range

In contrast, shotguns tend to be used in more general rural circumstances, such as by farmers who are protecting livestock from foxes – and police recognise that landowners need guns for pest control.

According to UK law, there is no actual limit on the number of guns or the total amount of ammunition that a Shotgun Certificate (SGC) holder can possess at any one time, though each shotgun must be recorded on the certificates

According to the most recent figures for England and Wales, there are:

  • 156,033 people certificated to hold firearms and they own 617,171 weapons.
  • There are shotgun certificates which cover 1.4 million shotguns.

Statistics for Scotland in 2020 show that:

  • 25,983 certificate holders held 70,839 firearms
  • 46,703 people in Scotland are certificated to hold shotguns and 133,037 weapons are covered by that scheme.

Independent referees have to provide confidential character statements in which they are expected to answer in detail about the applicant’s mental state, home life and attitude towards guns.

In the UK, single, double and tripledbarrelled shotguns as well as those which have a lever action, pump-action, semiautomatic and fixed magazine capacity of no more than three cartridges are legal with a valid Shotgun certificate and meeting the basic safety requirements for firearm possession in the UK. Types of shotgun ammunition, such a solid slug, can only be bought following the granting of a Firearm Certificate (FAC).

However, there is a major general problem on gun control in the UK. You see, while if someone wants to extend or modify their house, they have to apply for planning permission and that becomes public knowledge, whereby neighbours and others can comment and formally object, whereas any enthusiast can apply for a firearms certificate WITHOUT that being disclosed to the public, whence they can secretly own and keep one or more powerful loaded weapons in their house or flat in a dedicated gun cabinet, without their neighbours or community being any the wiser. Likewise, a young person seeking to rent a flat for the first time will need a sponsor, or guarantor to cover non-payment, whereas a young person seeking a firearms certificate doesn’t need anybody to vouch for them nor be responsible for any gun misuse. MADNESS, eh?

Who is accountable? – our MPs of course who have created laws that allowed such murders!

It’s been a chaotic debacle in Afghanistan but who is responsible – without doubt the despicable ‘self-serving’ Americans? (*Updated 4 Sept 2021)

Following the tragic, dangerous, unnecessary, and shameful abandonment of Afghanistan by ‘the greatest military force ever assembled’ (as labelled by past President George W Bush), with American forces who ex-President Donald Trump branded “the greatest fighters in the world”, after 20 years of hard fighting, close monitory, and vast financial investment, there’s now an ineradicable stain on the West.

Sir John Major KG CH who served as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Leader of the Conservative Party from 1990 to 1997 and served in the Thatcher government from 1987 to 1990 as Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary, was MP for Huntingdon from 1979 to 2001, launched an attack on the current Cabinet and vehemently says the UK’s withdrawal from Afghanistan and withdrawing troops from the country was “strategically very stupid”, whence the hasty withdrawal of allied troops, pulled out ‘abruptly and unnecessarily’, will be a “stain on the reputation of the West” for at least a lifetime

The US withdrawal and the inevitable collapse of the Afghan security forces means that every other aspect of our 20-year engagement (political, institutional, educational, social, health etc) has also collapsed.

It started to unravelled after a series of events that sapped the confidence of the Afghan forces which passed the initiative to the enemy, like the departure of civilian contactors, many ex-militaries, which removed the network of logistical and engineering support so vital to any war effort. More importantly there was the loss of air support (limited US airstrikes against Taliban positions were insufficient to halt their advance) – the Afghan fighters were ‘trained’ to fight with that cover so they previously had battled with a safety net of ground knowledge of ISR assets (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance), knowing they could call-in airpower when needed – with that gone they were ON THEIR OWN and the Taliban knew IT and capitalised on that! Indeed, NATO forces wouldn’t fight without such air support and the Afghans couldn’t successfully either, not least when the Pentagon made clear it would all cease by the end of September. Who made that defeating decision to remove ISR – was it an imbecilic military or a crass politician, eh? Moreover, the politicians in dealing with the Afghan forces merely exposed their utter lack of understanding about warfare – it’s NOT simply about numbers, training, or equipment, but it IS more about morale, will and confidence – the Afghan’s abandonment left them floundering, devoid of any belief or fighting spirit – while by contrast it of course buoyed the Taliban with inevitable consequences.

Then there is the fact that hundreds of thousands of weapons, vehicles, aircraft and uniforms were left behind for the Taliban so it is now one of the best armed forces in the World – it has seized the American and Allies’ Western-made abandoned weapons, as well as equipment supplied to the Afghan army, including night vision devices, assault rifles and vehicles, though the fate of 46 other aircraft is not yet known, as Uzbekistan announced that 22 military aircraft and 24 helicopters from Afghanistan requested to enter its airspace after the Taliban took control. The Taliban terrorists ‘gloatingly flew a captured $6million US Black Hawk helicopter over city of Kandahar. It is feared the Taliban could have access to up to 200,000 firearms, 20,000 Humvees and hundreds of aircraft the US donated to the Afghan army. Though the US military says that SOME of its equipment was disabled (the US Head of Central Command has said that all 73 aircraft left at Kabul airport were made unusable before the US military left?), but earlier this month, National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan admitted the US doesn’t have a ‘clear picture’ of just how much missing $83 billion of military inventory could now be in the hands of the enemy, though multiple outlets have estimated the figure includes 22,000 Humvees given to Afghan forces between 2003 and 2016 and Taliban fighters have since been pictured riding atop the vehicles in Kabul. Equipment given by US to the Afghan Army now likely to be in hands of the Taliban also includes 50,000 tactical vehicles, 1,000 mine resistant vehicles and 150 armoured personnel carriers. The terrorist group also released propaganda footage of body armour-clad ‘special forces’ with night vision goggles. Aircraft likely left for the Taliban to use includes over 160 planes and helicopters, including four C-130 transport aircraft, 23 A-29 Super Tucano turboprop attack aircraft, 45 UH-60 Black Hawk helicopters and 50 MD530 choppers. The US also donated at least 200,000 firearms to the Afghan army, including M24 sniper rifles, M18 assault weapons, anti-tank missiles, automatic grenade launchers, mortars and rocket propelled grenades.

Thanks to Joe Biden the Taliban now have more attack helicopters than the British Army and indeed they now have more Black Hawk helicopters than 85% of countries [Obama furnished ISIS with 4 billion with of weapons and equipment when he bailed out of Iraq, while Joe Biden’s abandoning Afghanistan presented the Taliban with 180 billion worth of weapons and equipment]

Thanks to the largesse of the American taxpayer, the Taliban now has more attack helicopters than the UK, and is better armed than almost EVERY NATO country, apart from the US

Between 2003 and 2016, the US bought the Afghan security forces 42,000 ‘light tactical vehicles‘ – such as Ford Ranger pickups and cargo trucks – 9,000 ‘medium tactical vehicles,‘ and over 22,000 Humvees. WOW! The Afghan Air Force (AAF) had 167 aircraft in the country at the end of June, according to a report published by the US-based Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) – these included 33 light attack planes: A-29s and AC208s (these are fixed-wing aircraft designed to carry out strikes against targets). Also among the 167 aircraft are three C-130 transporter planes, as well as 24 C-208 utility planes. Most of the AAF’s fleet are helicopters, also known as “rotary wing aircraft” – among them, 32 Soviet-era MI-17 and 43 MD-530s (the MI-17 is used primarily for transportation purposes, whereas the MD-530 is an attack helicopter), but perhaps the most recognisable aircraft in the AAF’s arsenal is the UH-60 Blackhawk helicopter (thirty-three of these infamous attack helicopters were in Afghanistan and operational at the end of June 2021).

The consequence of Taliban having this excessive military hardware is a dramatically increase the their capacity to inflict violence on communities they have targeted in the past, and their ability to rule Afghanistan more completely in a more brutal way is another major concern; the impact that aircraft may have on any ‘potential’ uprising against the Taliban, such as the small but growing resistance movement in the Panjshir valley, since the capacity for urban action is very much curbed by the arrival of potentially a single helicopter!

While some 3 years ago we British had set up a ‘Sandhurst in the Sand’ academy supposed to be Britain’s legacy to Afghanistan – with a generational commitment to train, mentor, and nurture the commanding officers (including any future head of the Afghan Armed Forces) who would ensure stability and peace long after NATO had left (a task predicted as needing years if not decades –but a commitment cut short by US and UK withdrawal and one now never to be fulfilled!). As the Taliban launched their attacks from rural strongholds, we simply ignored the high attrition rate amongst Afghan soldiers, then the more we stepped back, the more they stood up, with a capacity for great courage and resilience, but international assistance in the background was essential, so when unthinkingly that was held back and absent, it was unrealistic to expect the Afghans, led by only partially trained commanders, to hold the peace, wasn’t it? NO it was NOT at all realistic JUST MADNESS!

Through July as the Taliban (a fanatical group not constrained by the rules of War and like zombies were ‘kill or be killed’) advance grew momentum, Afghan forces – an army already on the run, withdrew from some rural areas to concentrate on deemed key assets (major routes, border crossings, key cities). It finally all undid in just some 11 days as the Taliban in mid-August forced their way into the centres of provincial city after city before finally breaching the gates of capital Kabul, occupying its central square, and triumphantly taking TOTAL control. That has all resulted from a long term planned abandonment of the country by the western leadership, accompanied by rank opportunism by the enemy. This has been a catastrophic military failure resulting from calamitous political short-sighted incompetence, no less.

As well then, we have as our own Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab (reportedly now said to have ‘a second-rate brain’) who apparently thinks his Cabinet job includes visiting Red listed countries [places the government says are not safe to travel to because Covid-19 is so rife] and possibly bringing back new vaccine resistant virus variants to the UK, so he doesn’t follow the required UK’s isolation rules, now deciding it’s also a good time to go AWOL on a 5 star beach holiday to Crete, when predictably an unfolding humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan was about to strike like a bolt of lightning, not only destroying countless innocent lives there, but also undermining British foreign policy [he says he was caught unawares and wouldn’t have gone if he’d known what would happen over that weekend! (is British intelligence these days really so dire?). It also turns out that he ignored the pleas of officials to act because he was ‘too busy’ enjoying his luxury holiday on Friday 13 August, during the chaotic situation in Kabul, to make an important phone call to ask Hanif Atmar, Afghan foreign minister, for urgent assistance in evacuating Afghan interpreters & their families (at risk from Taliban revenge killings for previously supporting British troops) – demonstrating massive errors of judgement and that from a senior minister, one holding the third highest Great Office of State (those posts being 1. Prime Minister, 2. Chancellor of the Exchequer, 3. Foreign Secretary and 4. Home Secretary), for which he refuses to resign. [The subsequent official report that the call was finally made, but by a junior minister, turns out to be a blatant cover-up lie and instead the defence now for Raab’s incompetence is that it would have been pointless him making any call (i.e. he is meaningless)]. Mind you, Raab’s boss PM Boris Johnson can’t really criticise any of that, since he also was having a summer break of his own in Somerset with his departure on holiday on the Saturday, despite public warnings the Taliban would be in Kabul within hours, was another astounding ‘dereliction of duty’, so he was equally absence during the fall of Afghanistan to the Taliban! It’s incomprehensible why both men had not cancelled their vacations as the scale of the Afghan “catastrophe” become clear (moreover, after churlish Raab was instructed by Whitehall to cut short his Greek island of Crete holiday he nevertheless nobbled the Prime Minister to remain on the enduring beach for two more days while Kabul’s besieged residents languished.

During a select committee hearing on the UK’s withdrawal from Afghanistan, Dominic Raab repeatedly refused to answer when he went on holiday A leaked document suggests Mr Raab travelled abroad on holiday after his own department had advised Kabul was at imminent risk of falling – also he repeatedly rebuffed questions over when his holiday began, and IF he was already on holiday on 11 August – when the US assessed the Taliban was likely to capture the WHOLE of Afghanistan!

Secret State department cables warned in July that the Afghanistan government could quickly collapse following the US withdrawal later in August. Around two dozen officials from the US Embassy in Kabul gave the Biden administration the stark warning in a 13 July cable. One report in July — as dozens of Afghan districts were falling and Taliban fighters were laying siege to several major cities — laid out the growing risks to Kabul, warned of the large territorial gains that had been made by Taliban fighters and noting the lack of resistance being put up by the Afghan’s own security forces. As well, the classified cable made recommendations to speed up the evacuation of Americans and its allies.

While here at home, a leaked Foreign Office report (the ‘Principal Risk Register’)warned government ministers on 22 July (a full 4 weeks before the fall of Kabul on 15 August) that the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan would lead to “rapid Taliban advances”.

[The Foreign Office ‘Principal Risk Register’ is a standard monthly report for the management board which does not contain intelligence assessments and indeed this department’s risk report appears to be at odds with the JIC assessment]

The department’s own document, which is not currently in the public domain, highlighted that there was a risk that major cities in Afghanistan could collapse. and were in danger of being taken over, following the departure of military personnel and the report warned of rapid Taliban takeover of Afghanistan and that assessment was published more than three weeks BEFORE the UK government in the middle of August even launched Operation Pitting (the ongoing British military operation to evacuate British nationals and eligible Afghans from Afghanistan).

During the select committee hearing, Raab appeared to be taken by surprise when he was asked why he had not acted on the Foreign Office July “principal risk report assessment”, the implication being that he wasn’t aware it? [there are two kinds of intelligence failures: there are those failures where the intelligence agency failed to provide the intelligence – and that is the traditional meaning of the word, but there is a second kind of intelligence failure where whoever is the principal didn’t read it!).

Mind you the pair of politicians [PM and SoS FCDO] prioritising their holidays over duty is just the tip of the iceberg, as it transpires that the top Whitehall chiefs in the Foreign Office, Home Office, and even MoD (so the 3 most senior civil servants overseeing the chaotic evacuation from Afghanistan) ALL had the same idea so were ALSO on holiday despite the Kabul debacle (the most senior diplomats, the permanent secretaries, being respectively Sir Philip Barton, Matthew Rycroft, and David Williams – all DISGUSTINGLY absent ‘on leave’ as the Taliban advanced and also immediately after) – the general government  policy seems to have been just let the thousands of Afghans die – they’re only bloody foreigners anyway! [We are, or expect to be, a civilized ‘caring’ nation yet have been let down once again by the British elite (reports have even surfaced of empty seats galore on some Kabul rescue flights, while refugees are left on the runway or die on it after clinging to and falling from a taking-off plane)]. It’s now rumoured that although Boris Johnson reportedly ‘had “full confidence” in Raab, he WILL sack Raab in the next reshuffle [don’t forget though that it was Johnson himself who picked Raab as Foreign Secretary in the first place and agreed to him staying away – what does that say about the PM’s judgement, eh?]
Britain has made a great play that the Kabul airport was kept open by the military for rescue flights but failed to mention that the Taliban were in total control over who was allowed to actually reach the airport (however, the airport has since suffered some shutdowns and is basically shut down for commercial travel and there was chaos as Kabul airport closed after a fatal crush at the barricades). One can be sure that the Taliban will NOT cooperate in the military keeping the airport open for longer to allow rescue flights, as their priority is to see all military gone (also there was and still is a major security risk of ISIS-K attacks on the airport [the US had warned its citizens to avoid Kabul airport amid concerns about the potential for terror attacks on evacuees by Afghanistan’s branch of the Islamic State (IS) group but that nevertheless happened on Thursday 26 August when two suicide bombers (obviously allowed through by the Taliban) killed well over 100 Afghans, and 13 U.S. service members, and that was followed-up by a rocket attack on Kabul airport by ISIS-K on Monday 30 August] The US showed just what supremacy of the skies can achieve (and should have done against the Taliban) when with a swift revenge drone strike it killed a “planner” of the suicide bombing at Kabul airport that killed at least 170 people – the military launched its first deadly attack against an ISIS-K as a “24/7” hunt for those responsible continues. Another US drone strike ‘eliminated an airport bomb threat’ – the drone strike in the Afghan capital Kabul prevented another deadly suicide attack at the airport and targeted a vehicle carrying at least one person associated with the Afghan branch of the Islamic State group (secondary explosions from the vehicle indicated the presence of a substantial amount of explosive material)
Here at home, Dominic Raab says UK plans to “Hold Taliban to Account” on protecting human rights in Afghanistan – the Foreign Secretary has threatened the Taliban with sanctions if they fail to protect human rights in Afghanistan. Doesn’t he know we lost? What planet is this man on, eh?
The catastrophic failure of the West and NATO in Afghanistan has inevitably opened the doors to Russia and China to achieve their objective of widespread world political and economic domination, hasn’t it?
Yes, but British troops must now return to Afghanistan because if we don’t there will be full-scale bloody civil war in the country, when Britain has equally abandoned its moral duty there when like the USA it chaotically withdrew troops holding the vile Taliban at bay – the country was being handed back to the very insurgency we went in there to defeat. The consequence of that is that that country will once again become a viper’s nest of militants and a safe haven for all other international terrorists to mount their attacks on America and Europe, while also the success of the Taliban in overcoming the legitimate Afghan authorities will be a catalyst beacon encouraging their UK fellow travellers to undertake acts of terrorism here. Belatedly (3 years off the pace) the Johnson government has at last decided to allow Afghanistan refugees, and those particularly vulnerable to Taliban retribution because they had assisted British forces, to now settle in Britain. However, that has escalated because of the exit debacle, so we are set to welcome some 25thousand refugees from that country to be spread around the UK in one of the largest resettlement schemes in this Country’s history, YET TOTALLY UNPLANNED and UNFUNDED as yet (when you can be certain that the bulk of those refugees were NOT involved in helping us to fight the Taliban) – amongst them though will doubtless be hundreds of clandestine terrorist or covert candidates prone to radicalisation, all given a free flight to UK, housing, benefits, health care and a cushy life here, only to use that as an opportunity to ply their evil terror trade – we cannot have any confidence that they can be weeded out on arrival nor watched thereafter, can we? No, as we cannot even screen, detect, expel, nor control the terrorists, who already live here in our midst, can we? Oh yes, it is ‘claimed’ that Afghans applying to come to Britain are being rigorously checked for links with radical Islamic groups and crime – but can we really trust that process when we already allow in asylum seekers who we are even unable to unmask as adults pretending to be children to gain entry, eh?

A man on the no-fly list reached UK during the Kabul evacuation operation triggering a security alert A person on a no-fly list from Afghanistan was reported to have reached British soil in an overnight evacuation operation. The individual, who is not being identified by the government, flew into Birmingham on a British military plane in a potential security breach. However, the unidentified man was later set free as after investigation he was not deemed as a ‘person of interest’ to the security agencies or law enforcement

Reportedly, during processing evacuees at the Kabul airport there’s been a spike in impersonations, forged documents and forged passports at the airport and at least five people on Britain’s “no-fly list” attempted to leave Afghanistan on British planes, and while four of them were prevented from flying, one person made it through to Birmingham. Furthermore, another barred individual also got a flight but was intercepted in Frankfurt and was successfully blocked from continuing his journey to the UK, though his family, however, was allowed to continue. Its clear that the government has been diluting checks and had a poor disorganised exit strategy, otherwise it would have ensured the necessary checks were in place, so these kinds of lapses couldn’t happen?

[A no-fly watchlist is used to stop people from entering the country who are thought to be a security threat. An individual can be placed in the no-fly list due to previous serious criminal conduct as well as terrorism. Once on this list, the individual is barred from boarding commercial aircraft or any aircraft during the time they feature on the watchlist]

In another situation, a French court has just handed a 10-month suspended jail sentence to an Afghan man for violating a surveillance order days after France evacuated him from Taliban-controlled Kabul, intensifying a domestic political row over suspected links between at least one evacuee and the Taliban [the possibility that there could be Taliban members among the hundreds of Afghans evacuated by France over the last fortnight has ignited a controversy in France, with migration set to be a prime battleground in 2022 presidential elections] – the man, Ahmat M., who says he was a prosecutor in Afghanistan before resuming his law studies, was ordered not to leave the Paris suburb of Noisy-le-Grand, where he was living with his wife, baby daughter and several other family members, is one of five people who were placed under surveillance after their arrival in France as part of an investigation into possible links with the Taliban. Another man, is suspected of working for the Taliban despite helping France evacuate nationals and Afghans in danger. He and four others deemed close to him, were placed under surveillance earlier last week. [the surveillance order included strict limits on movements and Ahmat M., who arrived at the weekend, told a pack of lies in court but was convicted by it late on Wednesday for straying outside of this zone. Another man told investigators that Ahmat M. had asked him to accompany him to Paris to buy SIM cards!

When New Zealand will now tighten its anti-terror laws to criminalize planning and preparation that might lead to terror attack, (closing what critics have said has been a loophole allowing plotters to stay free), after a knife-wielding militant inspired by ISIS (and known to the authorities since 2016 after he expressed sympathy on Facebook for militant attacks, violent war-related videos and comments advocating violent extremism) stabbed and wounded seven innocent people (three critical) in a supermarket attack. Police shot dead the man within a minute of the start of the attack, after he launched his stabbing spree on Friday – the 32-year-old attacker, a Sri Lankan national who had been there since 2011 on a student visa but had been convicted and imprisoned for about three years but could not be kept in prison by law any longer before being released in July. [In May 2017, he was arrested at Auckland’s airport where authorities believed he was traveling to Syria – he was charged after restricted publications and a hunting knife were discovered at his house but he was released on bail. Then in August 2018, he again bought a knife and was arrested and jailed]. He was released into the community in July this year when surveillance began, and he was being followed by a surveillance team and a specialist tactics group and monitored constantly, but the reality is, that when you are closely surveilling someone on a 24/7 basis, it is not possible to be immediately next to them at all times! Moreover, when the attacker is like this one, very surveillance-conscious, the teams needed to maintain a distance to be effective.

[New Zealand has been on alert for attacks since a white supremacist gunman killed 51 people at two mosques in the city of Christchurch on March 15, 2019]

However, what most people won’t know about Afghanistan is that the current sickening  events unfolding there is simply the end game of Britain’s FOURTH Anglo-Afghan War(or ‘Afghan War’), and it is a chilling replay of the first one (1839–42) and our infamous defeat in 1842– that first Anglo-Afghan war brought about probably the greatest military humiliation ever suffered by the West in the East – in an infamous retreat from Kabul, and a resulting mass slaughter, the only British citizen survivor from the 18,500 souls who left the British military garrison for Jalalabad was a surgeon, one Dr Brydon. The entire army (of at the time the most powerful military nation in the world) was utterly destroyed – no less than by a gaggle of poorly-equipped tribesmen!

[a dire situation later described (Rev GR Gleig) as:

  • ‘a war begun for no wise purpose
  • carried on with a strange mixture of rashness and timidity
  • brought to a close after suffering a disaster
  • without much glory attached to either the government which directed, or the great body of troops  which waged it
  • Not one benefit, political or military, has been acquired with this war
  • Our eventual evacuation of the country resembled the retreat of an army defeated]

    Someone will probably right much the same epitaph words about the current Afghan fiasco – this has been one of the greatest humiliations EVER of the US (it parallels and is equivalent no less of the to the Fall of Saigon Vietnam in 1975 and the whole situation is a denigration of the values of its past great American Presidents, succeeded this century by two yellow belly ‘commander-in-chief of the United States Armed Forces’ – being ignoramus boastful buffoon Donald Trump and now the cowering, weak, disingenuous, proven uncaring, incumbent ‘Sleepy’ Joe Biden, who has personally created this Afghan debacle when he ignored the reality that the facts on the ground did not justify his extraordinary idea that the only thing to do was to meekly surrender to the Taliban, make an imbecilic retreat, and for America to fly away, leaving Afghan allies on the tarmac to be captured by the fanatics the United States and its allies, earlier defeated. Joe Biden has made the entire world a hostage to terror and TWENTY years on from 9/11, it ends the way it began – with multiple acts of terror, cries of the dying and a grim-faced US President!

    Moreover, this ‘ill-informed’, ‘hide-away’ (in Camp David), President Joe Biden (the liberals’ hero), in the most contemptible speech by a U.S. president in modern times shamed America and left its global reputation in the dirt (his despicable dishonesty would have made even Donald Trump blush) – his own defiant doublethink, involving distortions, the rewriting of history, nonsense, and untruths that Trump would struggle to rival – how can Biden ever recover? Moreover, he not only dropped US’s commitment to a combat ally, but he washed his hands over abandoning a partner nation in the mire (saying in an extraordinary defence of his actions that it’s their own fault – accusing them of refusing to fight (translation DIE) when more than 60,000 Afghans already had given their lives (more than double the Americans and eight times more than the British) – only a moronic idiot would accuse them of lack of extreme courage or not been willing to fight. So also unlike his embassy staff he obviously thinks even targeted Afghan officials should have stayed to be slaughtered) and says he stands ‘squarely’ behind his crass carnage provoking decision to haphazardly pull US troops out of Afghanistan in an inconsistent non-reversal of a despicable Trump policy, so he not only inherited the Trump peace plan but didn’t change it and in fact he expediated it by a few months, eager to make good on a campaign promise to bring America’s longest war to an end (in recent times Biden has sought to justify his decision by arguing that remaining in the country for another “ten, fifteen years” would have made little difference, and maybe he’s right, but we’ll never know, though few outside of government share that view). All this from a man lacking military service, who himself like Trump refused to fight for his country in the Vietnam War [being one who received multiple draft deferments from Vietnam – five draft deferments from it for asthma despite he being a Lifeguard & Football player? His predecessor Donald Trump equally never served in the Vietnam War or in the military – for over a decade during the Vietnam War, Trump sought and also received five deferments (four educational deferments and one medical), including allegedly lying about that medical condition to avoid the draft during the height of the war in 1968 – his deferments from the military draft during the War, including a medical exemption for a problem with his heels! [Men between the ages of 18-26 had to serve in the military for 21 months under the Vietnam War draft unless they were given a deferment].
    In the aftermath of the chaos of Kabul’s evacuation mission, Biden deceitful tells his fellow citizens that “We might not get everyone out” – lives may be lost, but the reality of the situation is that there was NO realistic possibility of everybody escaping the capital city alive and he knew it! He doesn’t seem up to the task of leading the United States let alone acting as head of the free world!

Note: the former Trump administration struck a deal with the Taliban which would end US military presence in the region after 20 years.

[Trump’s deal with the Taliban was a bad one — especially the bit that allowed the release of 5,000 terrorists and assorted bad guys – (indeed it was in fact a rotten one that despicably none of the allies spoke-out about at the time afraid of angering Washington. But other parts of the deal were ‘conditional’ on Taliban good behaviour, and they’d already started breaking the conditions without response); also, they were to prevent terrorist groups like ISIS-K harbouring in Afghanistan, but clearly haven’t!

[ISIS-K is an affiliate of the so-called Islamic State terrorist group, which once gained large territories in northern Syria and Iraq. This splinter group, which was established in 2015, has been mostly based in eastern Afghanistan, part of an area known as the Khorasan province – which is referred to in their name ISIS-K – its fighters are thought to number up to 2,200 – although this figure could well be rising given the security vacuum left by departing foreign troops from Afghanistan. ISIS-K is far more brutal than IS in Syria and its affiliates. Since its establishment, it has targeted maternity wards, schools and vulnerable minority groups in Afghanistan, killing thousands]

Note the current leader of the extremist Taliban organisation in Afghanistan is a veteran resistance fighter who saw off the Russians, Abdul Ghani Baradar, indeed co-founder of the Taliban itself and deputy to Mullah Omar in the early 1990s, and who was previously captured in Pakistan in 2010 but freed from jail in 2018 (as part of Trump’s Taliban deal because naïve Trump believed he would help broker peace) so was able to continue his terrorism against us and our allies

The very idea the current President Joe Biden’s hands were tied is total nonsense (not least since he’s broken with a myriad other Trump policies). Nevertheless, the deal was honoured by Biden this year, who announced in April that all US troops would be out of Afghanistan by September. But over the last few months the Taliban has gained rapid momentum, claiming several territories including the Afghan capital of Kabul on Sunday 15 August.]

While the disaster of Britain’s retreat from Kabul some 170 years ago, should have acted as a warning FOREVER, yet Britain blundered into the second Anglo-Afghan war 1878–80 and indeed a third in 1919 – so three conflicts in which Great Britain, from its base in India, sought to extend its control over neighbouring Afghanistan and to oppose Russian influence there, and well before Blair signed-up with Bush to invade Afghanistan once again in 2001 after 9/11 – but thereby followed-on the same tribal rivalries, the same battles fought in the same places, but under new flags with new ideologies and new political aspirations involved, though involving the same cities garrisoned by troops who were ‘attacked’ again from the same high passes – and unable once more to prevent being sucked into a wider conflict than intended.

So much now then for “Make America great again” ideal (aka Donald Trump) but just some 20 years after the Taliban were ousted in 2001 (whence they had been waging an insurgency against the Western-backed elected Afghan government), we now have the Taliban, an Islamic hard-line terrorist group of militants, taking over the WHOLE of Afghanistan by force. The democratically elected President Ashra Ghani, abandoned and left to his fate unprotected by the West, following the chaotic withdrawal of US forces, and with the capital Kabul overrun, has had to flee his country, with his own life clearly in imminent danger – the Taliban will doubtless announce the ‘Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’ from the presidential palace, and continue their paused brutal subjection of the population, with their associated barbaric punitive public summary executions, torture, elimination of human rights and specifically the denial of women’s equality and rights, eh?

How can this have come about following a US military coalition offensive organised in October 2001 to defeat and eliminate these guerrilla fighters? What further is incomprehensible to many of us is why the alliance’s forces when in control of the country and with the Taliban ousted, didn’t destroy the opium drug production capability of the country, not least since it’s the massive income from illegal drugs that currently fund the Warlords and the Taliban with their terrorism?
[Afghanistan has been the world’s leading illicit drug producer for the past 20 years since 2001. Afghanistan’s opium poppy harvest produces more than 90% of illicit heroin globally, and more than 95% of the European supply. More land is used for opium in Afghanistan than is used for coca cultivation in Latin America.
In 2007, 93% of the non-pharmaceutical-grade opiates on the world market originated in Afghanistan. By 2019 with the West in control, Afghanistan still produced about 84% of the WORLD market. This amounts to an export value of about US$4 billion, with a quarter being earned by opium farmers and the rest going to district officials, insurgents, warlords, and drug traffickers. In the seven years (1994–2000) prior to a Taliban opium ban, the Afghan farmers’ share of gross income from opium was divided among 200,000 families. As of 2017, opium production provides about 400,000 jobs in Afghanistan, more than the Afghan National Security Forces. The opium trade spiked in 2006 after the Taliban lost control of local warlords. In addition to opium, Afghanistan is also the world’s leading producer of hashish (hash is a drug, consumed by smoking, made from cannabis)]
What have our own 5 star Generals in charge of this abject war got to say in their defence about their failures and defeat by a group of mere “country boys” (as described by Nicholas Carter – General Sir Nicholas Patrick Carter, GCB, CBE, DSO, ADC Gen a Kenyan-born senior British Army officer now serving as Chief of the Defence Staff), experienced despite their high level educations, elite military training, and widespread combat experience (say like Nick Carter himself, promoted September 2014 head of the British Army as Chief of the General Staff and June 2018 as Chief of the Defence Staff) that justifies their roles, with an abundance of letters after their names and a myriad of medals to sport on their snazzy uniforms? When are they going to do the decent thing and resign? Isn’t it true that our troops have simply ended back a hundred years to the days of Lions led by donkeys?]

[“Lions led by donkeys” is a phrase popularly used to describe the British infantry of the First World War and to blame the GENERALS who led them. The contention is that the brave soldiers (lions) were sent to their deaths by incompetent, unimaginative, and indifferent leaders (donkeys). In this view, the senior officers are assumed to be from ‘privileged’ backgrounds. A common view of the relationship between senior officers and their men in the Great War (1914-1918, aka World War 1) is summed up by the phrase. The phrase was the source of the title of one of the most scathing examinations of British First World War generals, The Donkeys—a study of Western Front offensives—by politician and writer of military histories Alan Clark].

Regarding General Sir Nicholas Carter [U.S. Lieutenant General Daniel Bolger, blames the British Army leader for death of troops in Afghanistan (saying he refused to carry out air strikes when asked for) and accused him of being ‘risk averse’ mentality for fear of causing civilian casualties] while in a heated briefing about Taliban successes Carter even attacked the media for being unpatriotic– unbelievably he claimed that NATO forces had scored a strategic victory!

Besides all else about Afghanistan, first one has to understand that the US (nor UK) did NOT go into Afghanistan to actually HELP the population there or IMPROVE their country, or introduce better government, nor take it over – as usual with the Americans it was a matter of blatant ‘self-interest’, wasn’t it? Yes, (or as espoused by Trump “America First”), since the US mission wasn’t to promote democracy or anything else there, but WAS to banish its source of terrorism threatening the USA which required them to eliminate key al Qaeda figures (including Osama bin Laden sheltering there), in the wake of the devastating 9/11 terrorist attack on America that included collapsed of 3 buildings including the twin towers at the New York World Trade Centre [A series of four coordinated terrorist attacks carried out by the Wahhabi Islamist terrorist group Al-Qaeda in which 3,000 people were killed. The terrorists had successfully smuggled box cutters and knives through security at multiple airports on the East Coast]:

  1. American Airlines Flight 11 a domestic passenger flight hijacked by five al-Qaeda terrorists. Lead hijacker Mohamed Atta deliberately crashed the plane into the North Tower of the World Trade Centre in New York City, killing all 92 people aboard and ensuring the deaths of 1,402 people at and above the aircraft’s impact zone. The aircraft involved, a Boeing 767, was flying the daily scheduled morning service from Boston to Los Angeles (California)
  2. United Airlines Flight 175 a domestic passenger flight hijacked by five al-Qaeda terrorists. The flight’s scheduled plan was from Boston to Los Angeles (California). The Boeing 767 aircraft was deliberately crashed into the South Tower of the World Trade Centre in New York City, killing all 65 people aboard and an unconfirmed number in the building’s impact zone
  3. American Airlines Flight 77, scheduled flying from Washington to Los Angeles (California), hijacked and crashed into the west side of the Pentagon (the headquarters of the American military) in Arlington County, Virginia, causing a partial collapse of the building.
  4. United Airlines Flight 93 a domestic scheduled passenger early-morning nonstop flight from Newark (New Jersey), to San Francisco (California), flight hijacked by four al-Qaeda terrorists on board, and crashed into a field in Pennsylvania, during an attempt by the passengers and crew to regain control of the plane (the hijackers deliberately crashed the plane in a field after passengers breached the cockpit door, forced their way in, and fought the hijackers over the controls – It ended up being the only of the 4 hijacked flights NOT to hit its target – that being in Washington, either the Capitol Building or the White House). All 44 people on board were killed, including the four hijackers

    One has to ask, who actually ‘empowered’ the modern Taliban in the first place? Well that would be the same blinking Americans of course – because back in 1979 when Russia decided to absorb Afghanistan into its orbit and turn it into a communist state of the 80’s, but understandably, since communism is opposed to ALL religion, it is hardly surprising that the religious fanatical Taliban fought against the Russian invasion, whence America within its political objective to promote freedom and democracy and prevent communist expansion, thoughtlessly encouraged, supplied, and supported, the Taliban extremists fighters in their successful quest, achieved in February 1989, to oust the occupational Russian invaders.

What we found out recently about Afghanistan is that in 2001, UK officials took a top-secret trip to Moscow for advice and the response from the Russians was brutally prophetic

In the days before the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, a group of British defence and security officials took a top-secret trip to Moscow.

The plan was to ask their Russian counterparts for advice on operating in the country given the former Soviet Union’s doomed Afghan intervention that ended in defeat in 1989.

One person who was at the meeting recalled: “When the Russians stopped laughing, they told us: ‘You will make the same bad choice we did, you will go in, you will lose, many of you will die and then you’ll be forced to retreat, which will be good for us. How can we help?'”

Twenty years on as the US-led intervention in Afghanistan stumbled through its final, chaotic days and the Taliban took charge, events could hardly have played out in a better way for Russia.

President Vladimir Putin’s government has one of the final few embassies still fully functioning in Kabul and has developed close ties with the Taliban, including allegedly helping secretly to fund and equip their fight against US and British forces – Russia has denied such claims of course.
In addition, images of desperate Afghans clinging to the undercarriage of departing US aircraft as Taliban fighters patrol the streets of Kabul are even starting to make Moscow’s past failures in Afghanistan look marginally less catastrophic by comparison.

At least the then Soviet-backed government in the Afghan capital clung to power for three years following the Russian withdrawal.

The Western-supported administration of Ashraf Ghani barely lasted three hours once the Taliban reached the gates of Kabul, with the president and his closest aides fleeing to exile without putting up any kind of resistance.

Britain’s Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab claimed recently that no one had predicted the speed of the Taliban victory and corresponding collapse of the Afghan government. “No one saw this coming. Of course, we would have taken action if we had.” IDIOT?

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex – Traitors to England and the Crown? (updated 7/06/2021)

There has NEVER been a bigger traitor in British history or a bigger rebel against the Crown than Prince Harry, nor a more High Treason guilty wife and one guilty of Extortion than Duchess Meghan Markle, has there?

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have been blasted for “blaming” members of the Royal Family as an “excuse” for MEGXIT when reportedly she never intended to remain a member of the Royal Family – her heart was NEVER really in it and we don’t buy she was driven out by racism (as even some of the projects she’s got involved with were seemingly in planning a couple of years ago)

Although Meghan Markle previously lyingly claimed she didn’t want to be a princess (the Sun on Sunday newspaper reported that Markle had fantasized about becoming a princess even before she married Harry), she now says ‘We can’t lose our titles’ and it’s all down to reports that, with the Queen, Prince Charles and Prince William are all said to be “deeply upset” by Harry’s outbursts, there are calls for him and Meghan to be stripped of their titles – which would wreak havoc on their Sussex brand, eh? [Meghan is releasing Markle, eh?].a children’s book, called The Bench, but her author’s credit surprisingly to some is: Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and not the plain name Meghan Markle

Harry’s defence will be that royal privilege is so stressful and debilitating with tiresome bow-ribbon cutting, endless statue unveiling, forever attending glittering functions, enduring never-ending banquet feasts, and continually facing noisy cheering public crowds, that it causes severe mental illness to both him an his wife that could only be relieved by a simple new life of luxury with little responsibility in in a lavish American LA retreat (but the couple’s first choice Canada didn’t work out (although Canadian mining magnate billionaire Giustra, 62, reportedly loaned them the seafront home close to Victoria, British Columbia for free) when the Canadians stopped providing security – and the tight pair didn’t want to pay tax in two countries), that includes residing NOW in a £14.5million mansion in LA (surviving in a privileged 8-bedroom, 12-bathroom, Tuscan-style villa property) which is next to a host of famous names (the Meghan Markle and Prince Harry couple are believed to be house guests of home owner 50-year-old tycoon Tyler Perry) and are neighbouring with red carpet stars such as Katy Perry, Jennifer Lawrence, Sir Elton John, Rod Stewart and Samuel L Jackson; they are further relieved by giving numerous extraordinarily personal expose interviews undermining Harry’s royal family accusing them collectively of “neglect”, while former actress Meghan’s excuse will be that she suffers racial discrimination and there’s an element of truth in that as she’s indeed a loud mouth yank who told Oprah she feels ‘liberated’ to be able to speak for herself – plus the USA’s background history being that the British government and King never considered the American colonists as their own citizens. which was the second among the three main reasons, which provoked the 13 colonies’ colonists to break free from Great Britain. (And also take into account that the former King Edward VIII, famously abdicated, endangering the very survival of the British monarchy, in December 1936 to marry the then American divorcee Wallis Simpson). Despite her past mental problems coping as a minor royal, Megan now believes she’s strong enough both to run for President of the United States and is then capable of being President and Leader of the free world with control of the nuclear button no less – no stress in that role for her then?

[In 1776, America voted to sever their political ties to Great Britain. The American Declaration of Independence was adopted on 4 July, a date that is now celebrated as ‘Independence Day’ or the ‘Fourth of July’]

This June, the Wessex’s finally shared their reaction to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s explosive March interview with Oprah Winfrey – when posed the question if either of them had watched the televised interview, Prince Edward jokily replied: “Oprah who?” while Sophie quipped: “Yes, what interview?”

The Earl 57 said pointedly the job is ‘not one you can walk away from’ which isin direct contrast somewhat to Prince Harry’s attitude, who did precisely that very thing some 10 months ago when he walked away without a qualm from ‘Royal Duties’ and the ‘Military’s Respect’ (Prince Harry made his position with the military untenable when he turned his back on Queen and Country – there was no way back from that. Prince Harry and his military background are well known. He spent time in Afghanistan, and his service to his country should never be forgotten. But by the same token, let’s not pretend he was some sort of war hero, eh?). The Earl of Wessex recounted ‘If people want to pay more attention to what we’re doing then great, because actually, that’s got to be good for our organisations and the work that we are trying to carry out’ and acknowledging that his mother’s the job is ‘not one you can walk away from’, the Earl adds, ‘It just carries on relentlessly’. So yes, the support is important, that we’re there. (After a pause and with a hint of sadness, seemingly reflecting on one of the most difficult years the House of Windsor has ever had to endure, the Countess of Wessex added poignantly that ‘we are still a family no matter what happens, we always will be’).

When Prince Harry next hits Heathrow (he’s expected to return to the UK for his mother Princess Diana’s statue unveiling on what would have been her 60th birthday on 1st July, but that’s in doubt as Harry’s wife Meghan Markle has just given birth on 4th June to a daughter – is it actually their own biological child though as is suggested it may have even been an IVF pregnancy) SO why not collect him there by car, securely transport him, and immediately imprison him in the Tower on charges of treason and rebellion, and afterwards line up Meghan for beheading on charges of being a spying American divorcee intent on usurpation of power including destruction of the monarchy, and the wilful kidnap/removal from Great Britain of the legitimate son of the above, eh?

You see, from an early stage of its history, one of the functions of the Tower of London has been to act as a prison, though it was not designed as one. The earliest known prisoner was Ranulf Flambard in 1100 who, as Bishop of Durham, was found guilty of extortion. He had been responsible for various improvements to the design of the tower after the first architect Gundulf moved back to Rochester (but he escaped from the White Tower by climbing down a rope which had been smuggled into his cell in a wine casket).

Well, the Tower of London has regularly acted as a prison in this country from the 12th Century through the 20th Century [including prisoners of war, rebels, treasonists, protesters, princes, claimants to the throne, powerful lords, plotters, spies, and heretics, so in total some 93 souls have been incarcerated and indeed a number died or were murdered there]

Moreover, beheading executions have been habitually used in Britain but of some 189 recorded beheadings mostly were men and just 7 were women (as below) and those included 2 wives of Henry VIII

1.       Anne Boleyn – Queen of England and Henry’s Wife (1536) – executed by sword at the Tower of London by order of Henry VIII of England for High Treason

2.       Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury (1541) – executed at Tower Green by order of Henry VIII of England for High Treason

3.       Catherine Howard – Queen of England and Henry’s Wife (1542) – executed at Tower Green by order of Henry VIII of England for High Treason

4.       Jane Boleyn, Viscountess Rochford – wife of executed George Boleyn, Viscount Rochford and sister-in-law of Anne Boleyn (1542) – executed at Tower Green by order of Henry VIII of England for High Treason

5.       Lady Jane Grey – Queen of England 10–19 July 1553 and Heir to the English and Irish Thrones 21 June – 10 July 1553 (1554) – executed at Tower Green by Mary I as Claimant to Throne

6.       Mary, Queen of Scots – Queen of Scots and Queen consort of France (1587) – Executed during the reign of Elizabeth I of England for Treason

7.       Lady Alice Lisle (1685) – executed at Winchester by Judge Jeffreys during the Bloody Assizes for harbouring Monmouth rebels

List of prisoners of the Tower of London’ [Reference: WIKIPEDIA]

12th century

  1. , Count of Mortain in 1106 as a prisoner of war.
  2. Constance of France in 1150 on orders of Geoffrey de Mandeville.
  3. William Fitz Osbert in 1196 for protesting taxation levied for rescue of Richard I
  4. John de Courcy in 1199 for rebellion in Ireland

13th century

  1. Hubert de Burgh, 1st Earl of Kent, Regent to Henry III, was imprisoned from 1232 until pardoned in 1234.
  2. Gruffydd ap Llywelyn Fawr, a Welsh prince, the eldest but illegitimate son of Llywelyn the Great (“Llywelyn Fawr”) was imprisoned in 1241. He fell to his death in 1244 whilst trying to escape.[1]
  3. John of Scotland (John de Balliol) – after being forced to abdicate the crown of Scotland by Edward I he was imprisoned in the Tower from 1296 to 1299.
  4. William ‘le hardi’ Douglas, Lord of Douglas and Scots governor of Berwick-upon-Tweed, imprisoned 1297, murdered in the Tower 1298

14th century

  1. William Wallace was imprisoned for a short time before he was executed in 1305.
  2. David II of Scotland was imprisoned in 1346 after being captured at the Battle of Neville’s Cross.
  3. John Graham, Earl of Menteith imprisoned after Neville’s Cross, hanged, drawn and quartered in 1347.
  4. John II of France was imprisoned after being captured at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356. Released in 1360 to raise his ransom, he returned to England when his son Louis, used as replacement hostage, escaped from captivity in July 1363. Greeted in London with parades and feasts, he fell ill a few months later and died at the Savoy in April 1364.
  5. Richard II of England used it as a refuge from rebels in 1399 before being taken to Pontefract Castle, where he was murdered

15th century

  1. James I of Scotland, then heir to the Scottish throne, was kidnapped while travelling to France in 1406 and imprisoned in the Tower until 1408 before being transferred to Nottingham Castle.[2]
  2. The family of Owain Glyndŵr was imprisoned in the Tower in 1409, a year after Glyndŵr had been defeated by Henry IV.
  3. Charles, Duke of Orléans was imprisoned in various English castles between 1415 and 1440, including the White Tower of the Tower of London as prisoner.
  4. Henry VI of England was imprisoned in the Tower after his capture between 1465 and 1470 and again in 1471, when he was murdered on 21 May 1471.
  5. Margaret of Anjou, consort of Henry VI, was imprisoned after being captured at the Battle of Tewkesbury in 1471 until ransomed in 1475.
  6. George Plantagenet, 1st Duke of Clarence, brother of King Edward IV of England, imprisoned in 1477 for treason and privately executed there in 1478.
  7. Edward V of England and his brother Richard of Shrewsbury, also known as the Princes in the Tower were sent to the tower in 1483 “for their own protection” after the death of their father by their uncle, Richard Duke of Gloucester and who then, according to popular belief, ordered their deaths.
  8. Edward Plantagenet, 17th Earl of Warwick, was imprisoned in 1485 by Henry VII and executed in 1499.
  9. Sir William Stanley helped defeat Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. He is often credited as placing Richard III’s crown on Henry Tudor’s head to become Henry VII. Ten years later in 1495 Henry VII imprisoned the same Sir William Stanley in the Tower, and upon conviction for treason had Sir William executed at Tower Hill.
  10. Michael An Gof and Thomas Flamank, the leaders of The Cornish Rebellion of 1497 were sent to the Tower before their execution.
  11. Perkin Warbeck was imprisoned in 1497 alongside the Earl of Warwick. He was executed on the orders of Henry VII in 1499, while trying to escape with the Earl.

16th century

  1. Sir William de la Pole. A nephew of Edward IV and thus potential Yorkist claimant to the throne, he was incarcerated at the Tower for 37 years (1502–1539) for allegedly plotting against Henry VII, thus becoming the longest-held prisoner.
  2. Gerald FitzGerald, 9th Earl of Kildare, a powerful Irish lord; held in the tower in 1526 and again in 1530, and again in 1534; he was executed in 1534 when his son “Silken Thomas” rebelled against the crown.
  3. Thomas FitzGerald, 10th Earl of Kildare (“Silken Thomas”), held in the Tower from 1535 with five of his uncles until their executions in 1537
  4. John Frith, a contemporary of William Tyndale, was imprisoned for 8 months before being tried for heresy and burnt at the stake in Smithfield on 4 July 1533, he is considered to be the first Protestant martyr.
  5. Saint John Fisher was executed on Tower Hill on 22 June 1535. Thomas Cranmer’s consecration as Archbishop of Canterbury had taken place in March 1533, and, a week later, John Fisher was arrested.
  6. Saint Thomas More was imprisoned on 17 April 1534 for treason. He was executed on 6 July 1535 and his body was buried at the Tower of London.
  7. Blessed Thomas Abel, chaplain to Queen Catherine of Aragon, was imprisoned for refusing to accept the annulment of her marriage to Henry VIII. He was put to death in Smithfield on 30 July 1540.
  8. Anne Boleyn, second wife of Henry VIII of England, was imprisoned on 2 May 1536 on charges of High Treason: adultery, incest, and witchcraft. She remained a prisoner until 19 May 1536 when she was beheaded by a French swordsman on Tower Green.
  9. In 1539, Hugh Latimer opposed Henry VIII’s Six Articles, with the result that he was imprisoned in the Tower of London (where he was again in 1546).
  10. Adam Sedbar, Abbot of Jervaulx, imprisoned in 1537 for taking part in the Pilgrimage of Grace, before being hanged, drawn and quartered.
  11. Blessed Richard Whiting Abbott of Glastonbury Abbey was imprisoned in 1539 for a short time before being returned to Glastonbury to be hanged, drawn and quartered.
  12. Blessed Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury was imprisoned from 1539 until her beheading in 1541 for treason.
  13. Thomas Cromwell was imprisoned by Henry VIII in 1540 before his execution.
  14. Catherine Howard, fifth wife of Henry VIII, was imprisoned in 1542 before her execution.
  15. Lady Rochford, sister in law to queen Anne Boleyn, held there before her execution with Catherine Howard.
  16. Anne Askew, Protestant reformer, was imprisoned and tortured for heresy in 1546 before being burnt at the stake.
  17. Thomas Howard, 3rd Duke of Norfolk, was imprisoned in the Tower and set to be executed at the time of Henry VIII’s death in 1547. Edward VI granted him as a reprieve, but he remained in the Tower until pardoned by Mary I in 1553.
  18. Edward Seymour, 1st Duke of Somerset, and his steward Sir John Thynne. Although Somerset was released from the Tower and restored to the Council, he was executed for felony in January 1552 after scheming to overthrow John Dudley, Earl of Warwick’s regime.
  19. Thomas Cranmer, Archbishop of Canterbury, was imprisoned in 1553 before being sent to Oxford in 1554 to be burnt at the stake for heresy.
  20. Lady Jane Grey, uncrowned Queen of England and her husband Guilford Dudley were imprisoned in the tower from 1553 until 12 February 1554, when they were beheaded by order of Queen Mary I.
  21. In the reign of Edward VI Stephen Gardiner was imprisoned in the Tower (1548 – 1553) for his failure to conform. Upon Mary’s accession to the throne he was restored to his see and made Lord Chancellor.
  22. The future Queen Elizabeth I was imprisoned for two months in 1554 for her alleged involvement in Wyatt’s Rebellion.
  23. In 1566 Margaret Douglas, Countess of Lennox was sent to the Tower, and was released after the murder of Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley in 1567.
  24. Henry Wriothesley, 2nd Earl of Southampton was imprisoned from October 1571 to May 1573 for his part in the Ridolfi plot to assassinate Elizabeth I and replace her on the English throne with Mary, Queen of Scots.
  25. Henry Percy, 8th Earl of Northumberland, for involvement in several pro-Catholic and Marian plots, from November 1571 to after June 1573, a few weeks in late 1582, and from December 1584 to June 21, 1585, when he was found shot to death in his cell; brought in as a suicide.
  26. Saint Henry Walpole was imprisoned in 1593. While incarcerated in the Salt Tower, he carved his name in the plaster along with those of saints Peter, Paul, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustine, and Gregory the Great. He was put to death in York on 7 April 1595.
  27. Saint Philip Howard was committed to the Tower of London on 25 April 1585. He died alone on Sunday, 19 October 1595.
  28. Robert Poley, spy and messenger for the court of Queen Elizabeth I, was imprisoned on the charge of treason. He used his time in the Tower to gather information on his fellow prisoners. He was released a year and a half later.
  29. Queen Elizabeth imprisoned Anne Vavasour along with  Edward de Vere and their illegitimate son, from March to June 1581.
  30. John Gerard, an English Jesuit priest operating undercover during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I, when Catholics were being persecuted. He was captured in 1594 and tortured and incarcerated in the Salt Tower before making a daring escape by rope across the moat in 1597.
  31. William Wright, another Jesuit priest who was arrested in the aftermath of The Gunpowder Plot.

17th century

  1. Henry Wriothesley, 3rd Earl of Southampton imprisoned (like his father had been earlier) and sentenced to death for his part in the Essex Rebellion of 1601 but was lucky to escape execution and be released only with the accession of James I in 1603.
  2. Sir Walter Raleigh spent thirteen years (1603–1616) imprisoned at the Tower but was able to live in relative comfort in the Bloody Tower with his wife and two children. For some of the time he even grew tobacco on Tower Green, just outside his apartment. While imprisoned, he wrote The History of the World.
  3. Guy Fawkes, famous for his part in the Gunpowder Plot, was brought to the Tower in 1605 to be interrogated by a council of the King’s Ministers. When he confessed to treason, he was sentenced to be hanged, drawn and quartered in the Old Palace Yard at Westminster; however, he escaped his fate by jumping off the scaffold at the gallows which in turn broke his neck and killed him.
  4. Sir Everard Digby. Gunpowder Plot conspirator, imprisoned in 1605 until hanged, drawn and quartered in 1606.
  5. Henry Percy, 9th Earl of Northumberland KG (1564 – 1632) suspected of being part of the Gunpowder Plot of 1605 and spent the next 17 years as a prisoner. He also paid a fine of £30,000.
  6. Niall Garve O’Donnell, an Irish nobleman (a one-time ally of the English against his cousin, Red Hugh O’Donnell) and his son Neachtain for turning against the Crown in 1608, where they stayed till their deaths.
  7. Nicholas Woodcock spent sixteen months in the “gatehouse and tower” for piloting the first Spanish whaleship to Spitsbergen in 1612.
  8. Sir Thomas Overbury was imprisoned in the Tower by King James I on 22 April 1613. He died on 15 September 1613 after being poisoned, and his murder resulted in one of the biggest scandals of the era.
  9. Conn O’Neill, young Irish nobleman of the Ó Néill dynasty, held in the Tower from 1615 due to fears of a rebellion to restore the dynasty’s power in Ulster. No record of him exists after 1622.
  10. Sir Francis Nethersole, secretary to Elizabeth Stuart, Queen of Bohemia was imprisoned for several months in early 1634 for having offended Charles I by questioning the king’s support for his sister.
  11. William Laud, Archbishop of Canterbury, was imprisoned from 1640 to 1645 before his execution for treason.
  12. John Barwick, English royalist churchman and Dean of St. Paul’s Cathedral, was charged with high treason. He was committed (April 1650) first to the Gatehouse prison at Westminster, and then to the Tower of London. He was released, without any trial, in August 1652.
  13. Sir Anthony Jackson acted as Herald in proclaiming Charles II as King of England after the execution of Charles I. Captured at the Battle of Worcester, Sir Anthony was committed to the Tower of London in 1651 for “invading this nation with Charles Stuart”. He was only released at the beginning of the Restoration in 1659.
  14. John Lambert, Parliamentary general and politician, led the Army in declaring against Parliament and was appointed Major-General. He was imprisoned in March 1660 after his soldiers fled the March on London. He escaped the Tower within a month, descending a silk rope to a waiting barge. He was recaptured and briefly held in the Tower again before being transferred to Guernsey.
  15. Major William Rainsborowe, Leveller, was imprisoned in Dec of 1660, on suspicion of treason and released on Bail in February 1661.
  16. John Downes, regicide and friend of Cromwell. Though he signed the death warrant he escaped execution as he tried to save the King. He was imprisoned from 1660 until his death in 1666.
  17. Henry Oldenburg, first Secretary to the Royal Society, was imprisoned for one month in 1663 on suspicion of espionage. He had been corresponding with scientists across Europe.
  18. William Penn, Quaker and future founder of Pennsylvania, was imprisoned for seven months in 1668-69 for pamphleteering.
  19. Francis Lovelace, governor of New York colony who was overthrown by the Dutch forces, 1673; on his return in disgrace to England, he was eventually committed to the Tower.
  20. Samuel Pepys, civil servant and diarist, was imprisoned for six weeks in 1679 for maladministration.
  21. James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth imprisoned and executed in the tower in 1685 following the Monmouth Rebellion.[4][5][6]
  22. Judge Jeffries was imprisoned in 1688-89 after the defection of James II. He died there of kidney disease

18th century

  1. Sir Robert Walpole, future Prime Minister, was imprisoned for six months in 1712 for corruption.
  2. William Maxwell, 5th Earl of Nithsdale, a Jacobite of the ’15, was sprung from the prison by his wife and her maid who kept coming in and out of the Tower so many times that they confused the guards, and the Earl was able to escape the Tower dressed as a woman.
  3. Simon Fraser, 11th Lord Lovat was imprisoned in 1746 after being captured at the Battle of Culloden before his execution in 1747.
  4. Flora MacDonald, a Scottish Jacobite, was imprisoned from 1746 to 1747 for assisting Bonnie Prince Charlie after Culloden.
  5. Sir John Douglas, 3rd Baronet of Kelhead was arrested in July 1746 on suspicion of having favoured the cause of the Pretender, Charles Edward Stuart, and was, on 14 August, committed to the Tower of London. He was given bail in March 1748.
  6. Stephen Sayre, an American resident of London, was arrested in 1775 for high treason in an alleged plot to kidnap King George III.
  7. Henry Laurens, the third President of the Continental Congress of Colonial America, was imprisoned in 1780 for treason.
  8. Lord George Gordon, instigator of the Gordon Riots in 1780, spent 6 months in the Tower while awaiting trial on the charge of high treason.
  9. Johan Anders Jägerhorn, a Swedish officer from Finland and friend of Lord Edward FitzGerald, spent two years in the Tower (1799–1801) for participating in the Irish independence movement, but was released because of Russian interests

19th century

  1. Sir Francis Burdett
  2. Cato Street Conspirators

20th century

  1. Roger Casement was imprisoned for buying guns from Germany to support The Easter Rising, in 1916.
  2. Norman Baillie-Stewart was a British officer caught selling military secrets to Germany and served four years in the Tower in 1933 until 1937, but he was not executed, because England was not at war with Germany.
  3. The last state prisoner to be held in the Tower was Rudolf Hess, the deputy leader of the Nazi Party, in May 1941
  4. The German spy Josef Jakobs was the last person to be executed in the Tower, on 15 August 1941
  5. The Kray twins were the last people to be held in the Tower. They were imprisoned for a few days in 1952 for failing to report for national service.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson, just another victim of the Pandemic – a busted flush with his bolt now well and truly shot?

SEE ALSO ASSOCIATED POST: The Elephant In The Room and with Boris Johnson’s Government in ‘real trouble’ following a number of “massive errors” of judgement during the coronavirus pandemic plus the ‘stench of sleaze’

You don’t have to be a poker player to see that no one could better could match the dictionary definition of ‘a busted flush’ than British politician, author, and former journalist Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson, Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and Leader of Leader of the Conservative Party since 2019, do you? No, as a card game ‘busted flush’ is something or someone that began successfully but later fails, so is anything which ends up WORTHLESS despite great POTENTIAL, and that’s exactly just where Johnson has ended up, eh?

You see, just 6 months into the role of running the Country as Prime Minister, he got floored and found wanting by the global coronavirus pandemic.

Whereas, the public had rightly and understandably had expected Boris by his previous utterings, to lead the Country into the coronavirus WAR with the same vigour and panache as his own hero Winston Churchill had delivered during WW2, whereas instead he succumbed to the powerful appeasers within government and in the end had orchestrated an unconditional surrender to the virus, hadn’t he?

His problem has always been is that he is an excellent orator rather than a dogged doer and his past success as mayor of London rested solely on his great ability to appoint good doers and ditch the poor ones, but he has singularly failed to do that in government.

In direct relation to the virus, he has for example relied on inexperienced wet-behind-the-ears, Matt (hopeless) Hancock Secretary of State for Health and Social Careand that significantly has led to the unacceptable death UK toll

Also, despite the fact that he had originally appointed an ex-banker ‘doer’ from a British Pakistani family, Chancellor Sajid Javid who became the first Chancellor in 50 years to not have delivered any budget as he was subsequently lost by resignation due of a rift with Johnson over special advisors, although that itself was preceded by Johnson’s apparent plan to reduce the power and political influence of the Treasury. [Moreover, Johnson had offered Javid to keep his position on the condition that he fire all of his SPADS (special advisers) at the Treasury, to be replaced with individuals selected by 10 Downing Street (upon resigning, Javid told the Press Association that “no self-respecting minister would accept those terms)]. The PM then appointed instead an ex-investment bank analyst of a Punjabi Indian-East African family Rishi Sunak, the then Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who was considered to be a Johnson loyalist, and seen as the “rising star” minister who had ably represented the Prime Minister during the 2019 election debates – but some of us believe that Sunak has shown a sad lack of worldly experience in dealing with complex company financial issues resulting from the pandemic, like an inflexible and unsustainable over-egged furlough plan, eh?

Well, in dealing with and managing this pandemic there were a number of metrics to be considered by Boris. In no particular order they were and still are:-

  • Minimizing cases and deaths
  • Shielding the economy
  • Defending businesses
  • Protecting jobs

These are all interlinked so priority given to one would have an effect, probably negative, on some if not all others.

So just how well does Boris Johnson’s performance stack-up on those metrics and which ones got the priority at the expense of which others, would you say?

Well, the Johnson SCORE CARD looks to be DISASTROUS, doesn’t it? Yep, to date he has FAILED to deliver on every single element involved

•        Minimizing cases and deaths:

THE UK IS 4TH WORST IN THE WORLD FOR NUMBER OF CASES AND DEFINITELY DEATHS, much worse even than CHINA, and BRITAIN currently has the worst death rate in EUROPE despite really bad outcomes also in ITALY and SPAIN

  • Maintaining normal life, upholding public wellbeing, retaining regular social activity and generally keeping people happy

THE UK lockdown, despite being fairly mild and non-harsh by other European countries’ standards, has nevertheless destroyed all semblance of life normality, has prevented even close family liaisons, and had halted all social and pleasure activity, which consequently left people fearful, frustrated, distressed, mentally challenged, and extremely unhappy

[In mid-April 2020 foreign secretary Dominic Raab had announced that the UK’s coronavirus lockdown would be extended by three weeks]

         •        Shielding the economy

THE UK lockdown arrangement has resulted in the Country’s economy going into freefall. Chancellor ‘Rishi Sunak’ reports that just “a few days of impact from the virus” in March, pushed the economy into decline and has warned of a ‘significant recession’ as figures showed the economy contracting at the fastest pace since the financial crisis (the economy shrank by 2% in the first three months of 2020 driven by a record fall in March output and that came after the economy stagnated in the final quarter of 2019, while economists expected an even bigger slump in the latter quarter, and the BOE warned that due to the unprecedented downturn, the UK economy is heading towards its sharpest recession on record and there would be no quick return to normality. For the YEAR as a whole, the economy was expected to CONTRACT by 14%. This would be the BIGGEST annual decline on record).

•        Defending businesses

THE UK lockdown restrictions resulted in Companies stopping or scaling back their operations despite action by the government to support workers and businesses through wage subsidies, loans and grants, as  many companies simply could not operate in a world of social distancing

•        Protecting jobs

Before March 2020 and so prior to the coronavirus pandemic crisis lockdown, the UK EMPLOYMENT rate had hit a record HIGH –Apr 2020 saw the UK unemployment rate tick up to four per cent, a small increase on January’s 3.9 per cent rate. In fact, the UK employment rate was at a record high of 76.6 per cent BEFORE the coronavirus lockdown, which was up from 76.4 per cent in the previous quarter.

The UK unemployment rate for the three months to February 2020 was estimated at 4.0%, largely unchanged compared with a year earlier and 0.1 percentage. However, economists had warned that the UK unemployment rate was set to rocket amid the coronavirus lockdown, and they had feared a huge 170,000 increase in UK unemployment for March, but the number rose only by 12,100, nonetheless job vacancies sank by 52,000 year on year to 795,000 for the first three months of 2020, while UK unemployment also inched up by 22,000 to 1.36m in the three months to February ahead of March’s coronavirus lockdown

UK unemployment was expected to rocket in lockdown – the estimate was that as many as 13m jobs are in sectors highly affected by the lockdown, representing 36 per cent of all jobs in the UK,” and that could see unemployment rising to just under NINE PER CENT during the lockdown period.


2018           4.1%

2017           4.4%

2016           4.9%

2015           5.4%]

However, a job catastrophe seems to be impending here  – a research study in April 2020 by the Institute for Social and Economic Research at the University of Essex predicted that more than 6.5 MILLION JOBS are to be lost in the UK Coronavirus lockdown, with accommodation and food services worst affected by restrictions with 75 per cent of jobs – about 1.3 million positions – lost. It warned that this would equate to about a quarter of the UK’s total jobs, with more than half of the positions in certain sectors being lost. While some sectors referred to as “other services” are predicted to lose 50 per cent and “wholesale, retail and repair of motor vehicles” is predicted to lose 47.6 per cent. About 700,000 positions (44 per cent) in the transport and storage sector could be lost and 26.5 per cent of jobs in “administrative and support services” are expected to go as well, the study said [The research followed an earlier report by the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR), which warned the UK economy could shrink by 35 per cent this spring and unemployment could rise by more than 2 million due to strict lockdown measures]. The University of Essex study showed a knock-on effect for certain industries from job losses, with the agriculture, forestry and fishing sector predicted to lose one job in 10 due to reduced demand from the accommodation and food sector.

However, some sectors could fare better than others as the institute’s modelling reflected the capacity of some people to work from home, leaving certain industries less affected by the lockdown

Moreover, some sectors, most notably health and social work, were predicted to see an increase in their workforce.

Although job losses are expected to be mostly temporary, an expert on modelling labour markets who led the research, has warned jobs could be permanently lost depending on further lockdown duration.

If this is short, say a few months, the links between employers and employees of affected industries might not be severed, and individual careers might not suffer too much, it was said. But under a longer lockdown, losses of human capital and scarring effects will occur. The economy will still bounce back, but at a higher cost for individuals.”

The analysis confirmed fears that a continued lockdown was economically unsustainable, raising pressure on the government to work out a way to ease restrictions.

We need to make the most out of the extra time the lockdown is buying us, and increase our capacity to better TRACE and ISOLATE new cases, especially asymptomatic cases, so that the economy can be restarted before a vaccine is ready.

There was a call for the lockdown to be PHASED OUT across SECTORS and REGIONS, rather than switched on and off altogether. Countries which had taken strong EARLY ACTION, such as Taiwan, were suffering reduced economic effects from the pandemic, while countries which have attempted to prioritise the economy, such as the US, were not performing very well in the crisis.

Doubtless, the economy is in trouble, but there seems to be no plan to fix it

Capital Economics agreed with this view, estimating the current four per cent UK unemployment rate could hit nine per cent. And it also predicted household income could slump 10 per cent.

Capital Economics’ chief UK economist, Paul Dales, warned March’s “small crack… may soon turn into a chasm

He pointed to a fall in employment numbers of 17,500 for March, saying: “That’s not a big fall, but as it relates to the average number of people paid to work in March it would have been supported by the normal two weeks at the start of March.

“It suggests that [the ONS’] labour force survey employment will soon slow.”

“We think that employment will soon plunge by about five per cent,” Dales concluded

Employment minister Mims Davies said today’s UK employment data was already outdated, but argued the unemployment rate show the economy has a robust underpinning.

“In the midst of the worst public health emergency in our lifetimes, today’s employment figures have already been overtaken by current events – and we’re doing all we can to help families make ends meet,” she said.

“But the statistics – including a four per cent unemployment rate – do serve as an important reminder of the strong foundations we have built as we look to withstand impact on the global economy


shoot (one’s) bolt – to exhaust oneself doing some task and thus struggle to complete it. In this idiom, bolt refers to an arrow that was shot from a crossbow The expression comes from archery and referred to using up all of one’s bolts (short, heavy arrows fired with a crossbow); it was a proverb by the 1200s.

If someone has shot their bolt, they have done everything they can to achieve something but have failed, and now can do nothing else to achieve their aims. Note: This expression uses the idea of an archer who has only one arrow or `bolt’ and is defenceless once he has fired it

Shoot your ˈbolt (informal) make a final attempt to do something, especially if this attempt comes too early to be successful: In an argument it’s important not to shoot your bolt too soon. Keep one or two good points for the end.

The Rule of Law: Abandoned by the UK

This post concerns The Rule of Law:

This is an extremely important topic in Britain as it is well-known that there is an absence of a written codified CONSTITUTION in the United Kingdom which legally restrains the ACTIONS of the GOVERNMENT and controls the exercise of public power.

However, the overriding principle of the Rule of Law, running under a Parliamentary Sovereignty and in conjunction with the ruling of the courts, is that ‘NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW and this is considered to be an IMPERATIVE safeguard against government arbitration, as our great nation should be governed by law, but not by ARBITRARY power.

“Be you ever so high, the law is above you.” (Churchman Thomas Fuller 1608- 1661)

It is embedded in the Rule of Law that NO PERSON is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or deprived of their goods unless they had violated the law which has been established in an ordinary way and applied by an ordinary court

Other factors include:-

  • The law must be accessible so far as possible, intelligible, clear and predictable.
  • Questions of legal right and liability should generally be decided by application of the law and not the exercise of the discretion.
  • The law must apply equally to everyone, unless differences can be justified.
  • The law must provide appropriate protection of essential and basic human rights.
  • The parties in civil disputes must be able to resolve disputes without facing a huge legal cost or excessive delays.
  • The executive must use the powers given to them REASONABLY, in good faith, for the proper purpose and must not exceed the limits of these powers.
  • There must be adjudicative procedural fairness.
  • The STATE must comply with the obligations of international law which whether deriving from treaty or international custom and practice governs the conduct of nations.

There are strict rules in the UK on how long a suspect can be held in custody for questioning before having to be charged or released [the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) provides that the police can only detain a person for“24 hours” following arrest(which is termed ‘pre-charge’ detention) before the person must be brought before a court or released (increased though to 36 hours if authorised by a police OFFICER of Superintendent rank, and up to a maximum of 72 hours which can only be authorised by a ]magistrate); so in normal criminal cases, the maximum period is 72 hours The Police can apply to hold someone for up to 36 or 96 hours if the person’s suspected of a serious crime, eg murder. Someone can be held without charge for up to 14 days if a person’s arrested is under the Terrorism Act. Alternatively the police can release someone on police BAIL if there’s not enough evidence to charge them]. Also article 5(3) European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) states that anyone arrested on suspicion of a criminal offence: “shall be brought promptly before a judge or other officer authorised by law to exercise judicial power and shall be entitled to trial within a reasonable time or to release pending trial.

It now appears to this blogger that there is credible evidence that a previous Labour government under PM Gordon Brown [Home Secretary Jack Straw; Attorney General for England and Wales Patricia Scotland, Baroness Scotland of Asthal] have disgracefully abandoned that essential constraining matter of principle required of our unwritten constitution, [but by omission the substance has been ‘condoned’ by subsequent Tory administrations including the current government] so esteemed responsible Members Of Parliament should as a matter of some urgency look into this matter and try to ensure that things are put right as far as possible.

The issue involved here is of course that of the suspected illegal physical detention by a criminal gang under the control of Sheikh Mohammed Al-Maktoum, [ruler of Dubai and reportedly a friend of the Queen, a millionaire foreigner with an estate in Surrey] of a young individual (a female foreign visitor – his runaway adult daughter Princess Shamsa of Dubai [then 19 now 39], and one innocent of any crime or offence), believed snatched in 2000 from a street in Cambridge, under sixty-five miles up the road from our law making Parliament, resulting in her consequent forceable kidnap and then ensuing involuntary and undocumented removal by air (helicopter) from Britain in a clandestine illegal extradition, plus subsequent abduction to another country (Dubai) where she is credibly believed imprisoned under lock and key with neither criminal charge nor conviction.

The initial intention of this blogger had been to find out what action had been originally taken by UK authorities on the matter, but to some extent that has been answered a few weeks ago by a downmarket weekend national newspaper’s (Sunday Mirror) disclosure by a retired Cambridgeshire DCI who had been leading the investigating team at the time, exposing that they were inexplicably blocked (assumed politically) from above and prevented from visiting Dubai or even interviewing the kidnaper suspects – his investigation was shut, suddenly closed down, and no action whatsoever was taken [said to be due to “significant sensitivities” involving the Sheikh]. Furthermore, it is also recently reported that the Police failed to respond to a personal desperate phoned call for help from the imprisoned girl.

In other words, or in plain English,

‘if you are Sheikh Mohammed Al-Maktoum, with significant wealth (billionaire) and influence in this Country and are ruler of a foreign power plus being vice president and prime minister of the UAE with important ties with this Country’ then the Rule of Law definitely does NOT apply here in Britain and “you are most certainly ‘ABOVE the law’ of the UK (so probably also elsewhere in the World within our influence).

This means that our governmentsfor the past 20 years have reduced our once great nation of law creators and enactors to a minor one, no longer governed by law, but one of arbitrary power subject to governmental ‘self-interest’ with a total lack of transparency, so not subject to scrutiny– the administration’s perceived intervention by arbitrary act in 2020 in a police investigation of criminal activity was clearly both obnoxious and indeed unlawful. Most of us will have had no formal legal training, but we are sure that those of you who have actually served in delivering law capacity will be aghast at our country’s abandonment of the basic rule of law principles, that we indeed have exported around the world?

It’s clear that public confidence in the police and indeed Police Commissioners will have been undermined by this case, not least particularly as there are claims of political interference at the highest levels. Now, although Downing Street has incredibly insisted that the Foreign Office had no role in the investigation into Shamsa’s abduction or its outcome, nevertheless the Foreign Office itself HAS confirmed that it DOES hold information relevant to the investigation, which IT REFUSED TO DISCLOSE to the High Court, claiming that it would harm the UK’s relationship with the UAE [that itself is a truly damming admission, but analysts aware of the sensitivity of the issue, say the UK government is unlikely to risk jeopardising its relationship with the UAE, an important trading and strategic partner].

Into the bargain, Amnesty International UK’s director Kate Allen, has called for a Police self-referral to the Independent Office for Police Conduct [IOPC] concerning the seriousness of allegations regarding Cambridgeshire police’s lack of due diligence during the investigation into Princess Shamsa’s disappearance. [Although Cambridgeshire Police had previously confirmed aspects of their 2001 investigation (which allegedly found insufficient evidence to take any action), will be revisited, the force NOW insists the investigation is no longer “active”]. The persuasive indication here is that the Government simply ‘turned a blind eye’ to the Dubai leader for failing to prosecute him over daughter’s kidnap in Cambridge (whence she has never been seen in public since) because he is a close ally of the UK and has substantial property here.

Nevertheless, Conservative frontbencher Lord Parkinson of Whitley Bay [a Conservative Life peer who has sat under this title in the Lords since 2019 and was appointed as a Lord in Waiting (one who may be called upon periodically to represent the Sovereign) in February 2020] responded (in typical government ‘cover-up’ fashion) claiming this was a matter for the police, and saying

“An investigation was conducted by Cambridgeshire Constabulary, who are operationally independent and the Government had no role in that investigation or its outcome.”

Furthermore, the Liberal Democrats reportedly are calling for an independent inquiry into what role the Foreign Office played in preventing that investigation going ahead, as the British people must know WHO took these decisions and WHY – if as it seems the Foreign Office disallowed an investigation into the unlawful abduction of a woman, it sends a dangerous message to the UAE, essentially sanctioning such behaviour.

Moreover, if true (as will be assumed here for the purpose of this post since the evidence is so compelling and also to avoid repetitive caveats), the UK government’s shameful behaviour inevitably empowered this evil bully of a Sheikh to undertake even further illegal international acts of tyranny against his family. The most shocking event perhaps was an astounding act of piracy on the high seas in 2018 when a youger Princess (Sheikha Latifa) was attempting to flee for the second time the Dubai gilded cage used by her father Sheikh Mohammed for years to imprison her. Having already overturned the rule of law in Britain, it was no great trouble for Sheikh Mohammed to then follow-up and entice the Indian government to also act illegally [with an improvised prisoner swap on his behalf to achieve the Sheikh’s objective of controlling this other ‘perceived wayward’ child; a swap involving British arms dealer businessman Christian Michel – who was extradited to India from the United Arab Emirates (UAE) in exchange for India handing over Princess Latifa whence Mr Michel has been held without conviction for two years in one of India’s most notorious jails, where he claims he has been tortured – despite the fact that a UN working group has intervened to rule that he has been arbitrarily held in breach of his human rights, so has demanded he should be released immediately and compensated for his time in prison]. The yacht Nostromo being used by Latifa and her friend Tiina Jauhiainen to escape to India [for Latifa to claim refugee status], was reportedly intercepted in international waters and boarded by Indian Special Force commandos, who took it over, imprisoned the girl, threatened her, drugged her, and then forcibly returned her to her prison home under her father’s control and to be further drugged – her father claims (believed falsely) that she is mentally ill (bipolar – an illness involving Manic and Depressive phases) and is being cared for by family with medical help. The utter falsehood of that assertion has been fully exposed by smuggled video messages recorded in a lavatory with a ‘lockable door’ from the brave Latifa who vividly describes her plight, solitary confinement, and fear for her own welfare – indeed her life is in grave danger by murder (which her father Sheikh Mohammed will claim as suicide), as he will be extremely angry that he has been exposed on the word stage and in his culture that is likely to massively override his duty of protection as a father (he is one about who his daughter says ‘all he cares about is his reputation, will kill people to protect his own reputation’ “He only cares about himself and his ego”). In total, at least three Indian and two Emirati warships, two military planes, and a helicopter were involved in the raid on yacht Nostromo, about 50 miles off the coast of Goa

Furthermore, last March (2020) in the UK HIGH COURT Sir Andrew McFarlane the most SENIOR family judge in England and Wales, found Sheikh Mohammed had as ‘findings of fact’ [in a Fact-Finding Judgment (FFJ)], “ordered and orchestrated” the abduction and forced return to Dubai of Sheikha Shamsa, in August 2000 and of her sister Sheikha Latifa twice, in 2002 and again in 2018. Also, the High Court found in favour of Princess Haya Bint Al Hussein ex-wife of the Ruler of Dubai (divorced by the Sheikh under Sharia law, though she was not informed at the time), forcing her to flee to London with their two children.

That Oxford graduate Princess, half-sister of King Abdullah II of Jordan, had applied for the children to be made wards of court; as well as applying for a forced marriage protection order in relation to her first child Sheikha Al Jalila bint Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum (age then 13 years) – Dubai’s sheikh had allegedly lined-up this then 11-year-old daughter to marry Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman, who is 22 years her senior, [the UK court heard Sheikh Mohammed Al Maktoum reportedly discussed the agreement in February 2019 which would have seen his daughter Princess Jalila –only aged 11 – married to Bin Salman]; plus a non-molestation order for Princess Haya Bint Al Hussein’s OWN protection – she had fled the United Arab Emirates (UAE) a month earlier having become “terrified” of her husband at the beginning of the previous year. Originally the Sheikh had sought to retain custody and was seeking orders for the children to be returned to the Emirate of Dubai, but he quickly abandoned that course of action [doubtless because he decided that he didn’t need the Court’s judgement as he freely could just kidnap those involve and spirit them away to Dubai regardless of any court ruling regarding ward of court order, protection order, or non-molestation order!]

It is decidedly momentous for the High Court hearing, conducted in private, to make a series of ‘findings of fact’ about Sheikh Mohammed, in particular in relation to the kidnap and forcible detention of two of his adult daughters from another marriage almost two decades apart.

So, what action whatever has been taken by our government even in light of this unopposed crucial legal judgement about illegality of action by a foreigner individual? Apparently, NONE whatsoever. WHY?

Hence no freeze of any kind on Sheikh Mohammed bin Rashid’s assets nor did we slap him with any kind of travel ban, whence he comes and goes as he pleases in Britain or elsewhere, regularly supports horseracing events and indeed last year attended Day 4 of Royal Ascot London along with Queen Elizabeth II, and he flaunts his wealth without a care in the world, despite his despicable and felonious actions. Mr Dominic Raab Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs since July 2019, when pressed on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme on whether they could actually apply those restrictions, made the lame excuse that there was a ‘strict legal threshold’ for such measures and they needed evidence of acts such as torture, forced labour or a killing. He added: “It’s not simply the case that we can willy-nilly just slap sanctions on individuals. Asked if Britain would consider sanctions on the UAE after the video, obtained by the BBC network’s Panorama programme, Mr Raab said: “It’s not clear to me that there would be the evidence to support that.”

So, he clearly determines as TOTALLY irrelevant:

  • The planned FORCED MARRIAGE of a minor at age 11 years [Sheikha Al Jalila bint Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum] which would constitute underage statutory rape in many countries – in UK if you’re over the age of 16 and have sex with a minor, you could be facing a prison sentence of life imprisonment

[Globally, the average legal age of marriage for boys is 17 and 16 for girls but many countries permit them, particularly girls, to marry much younger. Several other countries do not criminalise child marriage outright, the marriage is just considered invalid. Also many young girls are forced to become “common law wives” before they reach the age they can be legally wed. Child marriage is still widespread in India despite laws raising the minimum age to 18 for women and 21 for men. In Saudi Arabia the legal marriage age (with parental consent) is just 10 years old

Days before the first internationally recognised Day of the Girl Child (a United Nations observance held on October 11 every year), experts warn that child marriage is, WITHOUT exception, the biggest challenge to girls’ development. The number of girls married before the age of 15 is expected to double over the next decade, the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) has warned. By 2020, there will be around 50 million wives under the age of 15. This will pass 100 million by 2030, if current trends continue.]

  • Princess Latifa released series of secretly recorded videos [now past onto the United Nations] showing her imprisoned against her will and her claims she was threatened with being shot unless she co-operates with official statements issued by her father
  • Or that the elder sister Princess Shamsa personally phoned the Cambridgeshire police force in 2017 in a desperate plea for help to secure her own release from Dubai, 17 years after she was snatched in Cambridge [a victim of crime’s desperate appeal for police help apparently callously IGNORED?]
  • Plus the Cambridgeshire Police received a letter calling for new probe into disappearance of royal’s sister. Police have confirmed they have received a letter relating to the disappearance of Princess Shamsa, a daughter of Dubai’s ruler – it comes after the BBC said it had seen the letter from Shamsa’s younger sister Princess Latifa, calling for the police to re-investigate the case from 20 years ago. The force said: “We can confirm officers have recently received a letter, dated February 2018, in relation to this case which will be looked at as part of the ongoing review”.
  • Or the International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) report last month determining indeed that Princess Latifa IS ‘a victim of TORTURE’
  • Or even that the 2020 UK High Court judgement, found Sheikh Mohammed had as ‘findings of fact’, “ordered and orchestrated” the abduction and forced return to Dubai of Sheikha Shamsa, in August 2000 and of her sister Sheikha Latifa twice, in 2002 and again in 2018 AND had conducted campaign of fear and intimidation against his ex-wife Princess Haya Bint Al Hussein

Therefore, all that DOESN’T count as EVIDENCE in the eyes of the UK Government, eh? Well, that’s what happens when an individual like Sheikh Mohammed, due to “significant sensitivities” involving him, is above the law, isn’t it?

It’s quite obvious as well that both Boris Johnson and Dominic Raab, despite their weasel words and Britain’s innate culpability, have washed their hands of the whole Sheikh Mohammed business involving the kidnap & imprisonment of his daughters Shamsa, and Latifa, so disgracefully they are relying on other powerless international agencies (who have past form as being totally ineffective as they have been in this matter) to deliver justice and release these two adult daughters from their illegal incarcerations

Oh yes, our so-called UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said they wanted to see proof she is alive and well. He said the videos were “deeply troubling” and the UK Government would “always” raise human rights issues with its partners– including the United Arab Emirates [empty words!). While joining in, Boris Johnson says he is ‘concerned’ about Princess Latifa after the secret videos were released and furthermore has said he is “concerned” about Dubai’s Princess Latifa after videos allegedly showed her imprisoned against her will. The Prime Minister said: “That’s something obviously that we are concerned about, that the UN Commissioner on Human Rights is looking at that and I think what we will do is WAIT and see how they get on (BALDERDASH).” He added: “We’ll keep an eye on it.” [Her friends are urging the United Nations to step in after her messages from a secret phone stopped]. He told Sky News: “You can only watch the footage…and see that there is very distressing pictures, a very difficult case. “I think it is concerning. We always raise human rights issues with our partners, including the UAE [LIES]. “We are concerned by this and I noticed that we’ve seen the United Nations High Commissioner on Human Rights will be following up on what we’ve seen and we’ll be watching that very closely indeed. Asked if they wanted to see proof Princess Latifa was alive, he replied: “Given what we’ve just seen, people would just at a human level want to see that she’s alive and well, of course. I think that’s a natural instinct and we would certainly welcome that. He later told BBC Breakfast: “I’ve seen some of the footage and I think it’s deeply troubling. You can see a young woman and deep distress. He said the UK did NOT have a direct LOCUS in the case and the right mechanism was to deal with it through the UN (i.e. it’s nothing to do with us! The House of Lords heard earlier this month that the UK had made NO diplomatic inquiries about her safety to her father Sheikh Mohammed, leader of Dubai, OR the UNand that amply demonstrates the falsehoods of Johnson and Raab in their expressions of concern about Princess Latifa, doesn’t it?) – so just remember there are three kinds of falsehoods, lies, damned lies and statistics (1st Earl of Balfour)]. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights had first asked the UAE some TWO MONTHS ago for proof that missing Dubai Princess Latifa 35-year-old is ALIVE, but despite even further requests, it has of course received absolutely ZERO response so far! [UN spokesperson says UAE has not responded to its request for clear compelling evidence of ‘proof of life’ in relation to missing princess nor clarified the conditions in which Latifa was apparently being held]. It was such a simple request with an easy response and the very fact that both Sheikh Mohammed (and the UAE) have failed to answer or provide ANY proof of life makes one worry deeply about Latifa’s welfare – but when you are above the law like the Sheikh you don’t have to deal with international concerns about a potential murder, do you? [At a conference in Geneva, the UN spokesperson Marta Hurtado reported that a meeting between UN officials and UAE ambassador in Geneva has been agreed upon (The UN reported it also planned to raise the case of Latifa’s older sister Shamsa, who was kidnapped in 2000). Latifa herself has claimed to be held a hostage since 2018].

[Note various UN working groups have the ability to receive complaints on human rights issues and ask countries to respond but CANNOT compel action from national authorities].

When it was suggested to PM Johnson that Princess Latifa’s detention WOULD constitute torture, he replied: CONCEIVABLY it could do IF THERE’S THE EVIDENCE and those facts are RIGHT. But ….. it’s quite SPECULATIVE. [that crass mindless pontification from our own Prime Minister came despite the footage shared publicly by BBC Panorama when this daughter of the billionaire ruler of Dubai accused her father of keeping her hostage after she was abducted from a yacht during an escape attempt in 2018. Princess Latifa Al Maktoum claimed commandos drugged her as she fled by boat and flew her back to detention. In her videos, which are being handed to the United Nations, she said “All the windows are barred shut. There’s five policemen outside and two policewomen inside. I can’t even go out to get fresh air. So basically, I’m a hostage.”

Well, Boris Johnson says he is ‘concerned’ (claptrap) about Princess Latifa after videos allegedly showed her imprisoned against her will.

The UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab said they wanted to see proof she is alive and well. Mr Raab said the videos were “deeply troubling” and the UK Government would “always” raise human rights issues with its partners– including the United Arab Emirates

He said the UK did not have a direct locus in the case and the right mechanism was to deal with it through the UN (total balderdash)

Aware of the sensitivity of the issue, analysts say the UK government is unlikely to risk jeopardising its relationship with the UAE, an important trading and strategic partner. Asked if Britain would consider sanctions on the UAE after the video, Mr Raab said: “It’s not clear to me that there would be the EVIDENCE to support that.”

The UN has said it will raise the detention of Princess Latifa with the authorities in the UAE. A spokesman said the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention could launch an investigation once Princess Latifa’s videos have been analysed.

Those in the British establishment responsible for making the decision to allow Sheikh Mohammed to be above the law must be held to account, must be made to justify their actions, and be dealt with accordingly if they are guilty of abuse of power.

[Furthermore, in a damming indictment of the Foreign Office and the Cambridgeshire police, new details have emerged about the case which necessitates an independent inquiry into their roles following the claim that Shamsa had in fact personally contacted the Cambridgeshire force by phone in 2017 requesting HELP to secure her release from Dubai, 17 years after she was snatched in Cambridge]

Like in the Shamsa case, there have been past examples where apparently there has clearly been political interference with police activities [say like that of the late Cyril Smith who died in 2010, initially a councillor, who later became MP for Rochdale and senior figure within the Liberal Party. Serious allegations had emerged about sexual abuse committed by him (allegations that Smith raped boys at the Knowl View residential school in Rochdale and abused boys at the privately-run Cambridge House children’s care home) – the police had investigated but no further action was taken and there are also allegations which have come to light since his death, while police and parties simply ‘turned a blind eye’] so that failure to apply the rule of law is totally unacceptable in the UK which is supposedly above such uncivilised behaviour which we have seen in other counties like Russia, China, and Iran. Last year’s damning national Independent Inquiry into Child Sex Abuse (that inquiry into child abuse was announced by Theresa May when she was Home Secretary) found that the Westminster establishment KNEW Cyril Smith, was abusing children dating back to the 1960s, but COVERED IT UP, plus there had been a “significant problem” of deference towards people of public prominence [Smith and other high-profile MPs, including the late Conservative Sir Peter Morrison, were protected from police action by their parties as their whips tried to avoid damaging ‘gossip and scandal’]. One has to question the integrity and morality of actions by former Liberal leader Lord Steel, in recommending Smith for a knighthood in 1988 [and duly sanctioned of course by the Cabinet Office honours committee that oversees the honours system and reviews nominations for national honours, so what confidence does that give us the public in its role in weeding out the unworthy? NONE] and moreover one who’s total inaction after being told by Cyril Smith himself (who’s acts were vile and repugnant), that he had molested young boys, [unforgivable most of all for those victims whose abuse he could have stopped and instead he gave Smith a licence to carry on abusing]. There’s no excuse for David Steel’s deeds, a man who admitted he knowingly turned a blind eye to Smith’s crimes (he is not being blamed for them but for his own failure to stop Smith when he had the chance). The former Liberal leader told an inquiry he was aware late Rochdale MP Smith was a child abuser but failed to take action and during one hearing, Lord Steel said he ‘assumed’ the former Rochdale MP had abused teenagers at one hostel dating back to the 1960s [after his Cyril Smith admissions in which he admits he knew Cyril Smith was a paedophile after his 1979 confession, David Steel was suspended from the Lib Dems two years ago and resigned last year after the damning Child Sex Abuse report: Lord Steel should have provided leadership, but instead, he abdicated his responsibility and he looked at Cyril Smith not through the lens of child protection but through the lens of political expediency and when attending the inquiry, far from recognising the consequences of his inaction, Lord Steel was completely unrepentant. – he told the inquiry: “These allegations all related to a period some years before he was even an MP and before he was even a member of the party, therefore it did not seem to me that I had any position in the matter at all!

Going back then to what happened in Cambridge in 2000, which raises supplementary issues and begs the question about other potential illegalities involved, doesn’t it?

  • For example, did the helicopter fly into the UK and if so WHO and WHAT did it bring – perhaps mafia bosses, a criminal gang and a group of illegal immigrants plus a ton of hashish, heroin, cocaine and the new synthetic cannabis drug “K2” from Dubai and UAE?
  • Or if the chopper was UK based what offences did the pilot and operators commit in exiting undocumented individuals from the UK and in particular an unwilling and ‘non-convicted’ illegal prisoner?

When an environment is created whereby someone is clearly seen to be above the law, this only encourages numerous influential and rich others or those in positions of power and responsibility, to consider themselves to also be above the law. Just last month we have the situation whereby a serving MET policeman of the Parliamentary and Diplomatic Protection unit, was arrested for indecent exposure, plus charged with the ghastly abduction/kidnap, and murder of a young woman (Sarah Everard a33-year-old marketing executive who disappeared in South London and was living at the time in London’s Brixton Hill area, but she went missing after leaving a friend’s house near Clapham Common to walk home – police confirmed Sarah’s body had been found in Kent). Or a lone female Leicester mum who was drunkenly attacked near her home in a violent assault and put in a headlock by an out of control off-duty policeman as he walked home from a night out [although he admitted assault, he was spared jail and was initially only taken off public duty by West Midland police but has since been suspended].

Then in recent weekend newspapers we have:

  • Dreadful reports of shameful ‘sexism, sleaze and bullying rife in police according to claims by former officers including Susannah Fish a FEMALE former CHIEF CONSTABLE no less [so an illegal culture of sexism & misogyny (i.e., an ingrained prejudice against women) in the British police implicating some of our biggest forces nationwide and specifically the Met, Nottinghamshire, and Manchester police] (Sunday Mirror). It is said that the police force attracts bullies and figures reveal that more than a third of 666 reports of domestic abuse related incidents and offences perpetrated by police officers in the UK’s 45 forces, came from the Met (but strangely somehow the numbers don’t get reflected in convictions!). Since last year the Centre for Women’s’ Justice [CWI] have been contacted by more than 100 women who claim to have been assaulted by a police officer which reveals both the sexist culture within the police service and demonstrates the stark failure of police investigations into abuse by its officers [the National Recruitment Standards-Eligibility Criteria For Police Recruitment circular identifies that those as having unacceptable attitudes towards women should not be considered]
  •  In concurrence as well, from Sir Peter Fahy a MALE former CHIEF CONSTABLE indeed revealed that he wouldn’t want HIS two grown-up daughters to join policing and they themselves would NEVER join the police force because they wouldn’t be comfortable
  • What the heck then about Commissioner Cressida Dick, the first woman (just blatant window-dressing?) to lead the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS or Met) in London, which she joined in 1983 as a constable, patrolling a beat in the West End of London (previously she was a high-ranking officer in the Thames Valley Police), but she now heads up the Met and has done so since 2017, so why does it take a budget tabloid newspaper to expose the shocking extent of male sexism in our national police forces and indeed the sickening sleaze and bullying in her OWN organisation – what has she done or attempted to do, to drive it out in the past four years, and why has she failed so obviously and so disastrously eh?


and allow them to FEEL SAFE on our streets after dark

WITHOUT having to stick to main roads plus stay in well-lit areas and go accompanied (women should only go out in pairs or in large groups after darkness, remaining close to the people they trust and know well)/ get taxis (always book) or arrange a lift/ don’t wear a short skirt or outfits society might deem ‘provocative’/ walk with keys between knuckles/ drink in moderation & watch their drink/ keep valuables hidden/ keep away from hostile situations/ let someone know when they are coming home and the route they are taking and always be alert in their surroundings, so don’t use earphones or handheld devices


Victim blaming: women are urged not to wear headphones or use mobile phones but it is NOT a law-abiding woman’s RESPONSIBILITY to stay safe and avoid being a victim of sexual violence!

NEW legislation therefore is urgently required that introduces

  1. Certain reasonable restrictions on men to prevent their often-unacceptable and PREDATORY behaviour, or make it an offence for MEN to do certain things that are scaring to WOMEN– so perhaps:
  2. A CURFEW for men so for them NOT be out in the streets after darkwithout good reason’

[akin to the law about Coronavirus which currently restricts ANYONE going out, to those:

  • Visiting someone who is ill or needs helpGoing to a wedding or funeralGoing to workLeaving home for another reason (education or childcare/getting goods from shops or visiting food banks/getting money or topping up a prepayment meter/going to a place of worship/avoiding being harmed or helping someone in an emergency/doing something the law says you have to – for example going to court)]

But in this male CURFEW case it would also ALLOW say:

  • Going to or from a place of entertainment (including pub or club)Attending a gym or sports venueVisiting family – where allowed
  • 3 for a man to follow a woman after dark for any substantial distance, or time, on the same side of the road/pavement, or within 50 yards
  • 4 Make it an offence for a man to approach a lone woman outside particularly after dark, try to chat to her, ask for a kiss or a hug
  • 5 make erotic style comments/remarks and talk sexually, or make despicable sexual observations to others about a woman, as is increasingly common in the of culture a boys’ locker room type atmosphere or sexist workplace
  •   6 Make it an offence to bump into women resulting in a brush against their breasts as is a regular ploy by men exploiting restricted spaces at work and in crowded public areas or transport
  • 7 Make it an offence for a man to sexually proposition a subservient female colleague
  • 8 Legislation to prevent women being demeaned and promoted as mere sex objects as is widespread and is depicted in strip clubs or with topless, nude, or so-called glamour pictures, of females [consequently an increasingly large group of vile animalistic men feel empowered to disrespect, sexually abuse, or even attack women which simply leaves the general female community in a constant state of worry of being sexually assaulted.

MEN have created an environment in Britain whereby LUST has replaced LOVE and SOCIAL INTERACTION has been replaced by SEXUAL INTERCOURSE – consequently this outcome needs to be rescinded

  • 9 Banning or greater restriction of all pornography (not just hardcore – though mainstream hardcore material in forms such as magazines and websites is currently essentially UNRESTRICTED in UK) on video and DVD and particularly as available by telephone, on television and via the internet, which has taken diverse forms and become more widespread in UK society in the twentieth and twenty-first centuries with production of a horde of pornographic magazines and films being developed, to in future to ‘make it illegal to take, permit to be taken, make, distribute, show, have in one’s possession, publish or cause to be published any indecent photograph or pseudo-photograph of any woman not in a current relationship with’ –  so not restricted to just a child (defined as someone under the age of 18 years old).as is the present law under The Protection of Children Act 1978 (and its subsequent amendments). [The current British legislative framework including the Obscene Publications Act 1959 (in England and Wales), the Civic Government (Scotland) Act 1982 and the Video Recordings Act 1984 leads to a confusing situation in which there is a ‘theoretical’ ban on the publication and distribution (but not possession) of pornographic material in any form, which is in practice UNENFORCEABLE due to the vagueness of the legal test of material that “depraves and corrupts”].
  • plus of course further criticism of the Met police’s [under the control of the said Cressida Dick] mishandling, or more accurately MAN-handling, of attendees at the Sarah Everard Clapham Common unofficial London vigil (which also silently expressed protest against persistently unpunished endemic male attacks on innocent WOMEN walking our streets at night), but nevertheless that event inexplicably resulted in the police-MEN’s physical assaults on peaceful virus-mask wearing FEMALE ladies, supposedly for society’s coronavirus protection law reasons excuse [However, the subsequent official enquiry report [whitewash?] by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services [Matt Parr, led the inspection team for HMICFRS] found and deemed that Met Police Officers “did not act inappropriately or in a heavy-handed manner” at the Sarah Everard Vigil, and the public were misled into thinking so without knowing the facts by the incomplete but widely disseminated on social media snapshot coverage [that being the arrests of peaceful women by rough policemen] – it said it found that there are some things the Met could have done better, but saw nothing to suggest police officers acted in anything but a measured and proportionate way in challenging circumstances]..
  • and furthermore the unnerving news that British socialite Ghislaine Maxwell’s private life [she is currently awaiting trial in the USA on multiple charges relating to the sexual abuse of young women and girls (regarding her alleged role in recruiting young girls for her former deceased partner, billionaire paedophile Jeffrey Epstein)] will have to stay under wraps (her interview transcript is redacted [(censored or obscured), as it contains disclosures that should NOT be made public because the judge said they would ‘merely cater to a craving for that which is sensational and impure’ (Daily Telegraph)].
  • Then we have the case brought by Douglas Ross Scottish Tory leader who has argued that the SNP and First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is guilty of an “abuse of power” and covering “over the truth” having squandered nearly three quarters of a million pounds of taxpayers’ money, a huge cost, by fighting a judicial review legal case she had been clearly advised by her SNP government lawyers [including Scotland’s most senior lawyer Roddy Dunlop QC] that she would lose three months before finally admitting defeat in a court battle brought by her predecessor First Minister Alex Salmond [that matter involved a botched Scottish Government investigation into unproven sexual harassment complaints against Alex Salmond (who was indeed ACQUITTED of 13 charges of sexual actions following a criminal trial last year) – the SNP government’s investigation was ruled unlawful and described as “tainted by apparent bias” by a Court of Session in Edinburgh. Ross also claimed the SNP were ‘engulfed in sleaze’ as for example Patrick Grady stepped aside as Westminster chief whip after being ACCUSED of groping two men at a Christmas party and a 19-year-old in a pub – amid claims he was ‘protected’ by the party despite complaints. Additionally, the SNP has been rocked by further sexual misconduct claims, after a Westminster party staffer accused two nationalist MPs of sexually harassing him. Likewise, it is alleged that Ian Blackford SNP Westminster leader ‘ambushed’ party staffer in meeting over SNP MP sexual harassment claims

Amidst the stench of such SNP sexism Nicola Sturgeon brushed off the Holyrood bombshell report by the committee investigating her and Alex Salmond in which MSPs said its ‘HARD to believe’ she didn’t know, as his deputy, of concerns over Alex Salmond’s inappropriate sexual behaviour OR others would suggest that should read ‘IMPOSSIBLE’ to believe’. However, Nicola Sturgeon clings on to her job as First Minister for now as a Hamilton QC report ruled thatshe didn’t break ministerial code whence Salmond’s allegations that she broke the ministerial code collapsed and she subsequently triumphed in a no-confidence vote

James Hamilton (barrister), was an independent advisor for the Scottish and the Welsh governments, and Ireland’s former director of public prosecutions 1999 to 2011 (his nationality is Irish), submitted the findings of his independent investigation 22 Mar 2021.

He had been examining whether Ms Sturgeon broke the ministerial code of conduct by:

1.Misleading parliament over when she found out about her government’s investigation into Mr Salmond.

2.Misleading parliament by claiming she did not offer to intervene in her government’s investigation.

3.Failing to record her meetings with Mr Salmond

  • Internationally in addition particular then, it is hardly surprising that President Vladimir Putin of Russia felt empowered in March 2018 to dispatch a kill squad of active officers in Russian military intelligence to the city of Salisbury, England for the attempted assassination of Sergei Skripal a former Russian military officer and double agent for the British intelligence agencies [the failed attempted murder poisoning effort on him and his daughter (who may have been poisoned after calling for Putin to be jailed on Facebook), used Novichok a Soviet-era nerve agent, but later in June 2018, a similar poisoning of two totally innocent British nationals (killing one Dawn Sturgess) in Amesbury, seven miles north of Salisbury, involved the same Novichok nerve agent, (although that itself was not a targeted attack but it may have been left in Salisbury deliberately in a Russian state role as part of a campaign to undermine security in the UK)]
  • Or that the same President Putin approved the horrific successful assassination in November 2006 of former Russian spy Alexander Valterovich Litvinenko [it is suggested that the motive was Litvinenko’s revelations about Vladimir Putin’s links with the criminal underworld] – Litvinenko was a British-naturalised Russian defector and former officer of the Russian Federal Security Service who specialised in tackling organized crime. (According to US diplomats, Litvinenko coined the phrase “mafia state”). That murderous “state execution” in London was by poisoning using polonium-210 (a radioactive isotope that will have been made in a nuclear reactor); he died from the poisoning on 23 November. He became the first known victim of lethal polonium 210-induced acute radiation syndrome (it is believed that it was surreptitiously administered in a cup of tea)].
  • Indeed, there is a long history of Russian deaths in the UK under mysterious circumstances – from poisoned umbrellas (Bulgarian dissident Georgi Markov, who was poisoned with an umbrella injecting a deadly 1.7mm-wide pellet of poisonous ricin in his skin, while waiting for a bus on Waterloo Bridge in 1978) to radioactive substances – Moscow and the Russian state has repeatedly been linked with attacks, murders and deaths on British soil, hasn’t it? Yes, for example in March 2012, exiled Russian banker German Gorbuntsov survived an assassination attempt as he stepped out of a taxi in Canary Wharf East London (a hitman had shot him six times with a silenced pistol). Also, later that year, Alexander Perepilichnyy, who was helping Swiss prosecutors uncover a multi-million-pound money laundering scheme used by corrupt Russian officials, died in mysterious circumstances outside his home in Weybridge, Surrey (the businessman collapsed while out running and it was initially believed he had suffered a heart attack, but however, traces of a poison that can be found in the gelsemium plant were later found in his stomach). The British government was accused of turning a blind eye to evidence that he was assassinated on Vladimir Putin’s direct order!
  • The following year, oligarch Boris Berezovsky, a vocal critic of Mr Putin’s regime, was found hanged in March 2013 in an apparent suicide, but the pathologist who conducted his post-mortem said he was unable to rule out murder. Then in December 2014, one of his associates Scot Young, was found impaled on railings in Marylebone after allegedly falling from his flat, but a coroner ruled there was insufficient evidence to rule his death was a suicide.
  • Then there’s also the case of Putin critic and Russian dissident Nikolai Glushkov, a close friend of the deceased  oligarch Boris Berezovsky [Putin’s one-time fiercest rival], murdered in the hall of his own south west London home in 2018 (a week after the attempted poising by nerve agent of the two Skripals in Salisbury) who’s death was made to look like suicide said the coroner at an inquest [Glushkov had feared that he was on a Kremlin hit list – a post-mortem examination concluded he died at the hands of a third party, due to compression of the neck].
  • Furthermore, is it any wonder that Britain is treated with total contempt and distain over the plight of HOSTAGE Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe [a British-Iranian (i.e. a British-Iranian dual national) mother] and proved to be weak and powerless when Iran’s Revolutionary Guards (IRG) in April, 2016 commenced her imprisonment, torture and ill-treatment during her detention on spying charges in Iran over the last five years [This March 2021 an International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims (IRCT) report warns she IS ‘a victim of torture’ and in urgent need of medical support] in an arms deal and sanctions trap as another example of Tehran’s Iran policy of “hostage diplomacy” [her fate is linked to an arms deal dating from the reign of deposed Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi (he had ordered and paid for 1,750 tanks and support vehicles from a firm owned by the MoD – but the deal was halted after he was deposed and Britain kept the money). The UK has agreed to pay Iran its dues, but US sanctions present a problematic challenge]

Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe 42, after nearly five years in an Iran prison, (imprisoned since 2016), though recently released on March 7 (her initial sentence served, she was allowed to remove her electronic bracelet worn while under latter house arrest) her passport had not been returned so she was not allowed to leave to re-join in the UK her husband and now 6-year-old daughter (who returned to London in 2019 to start school in the UK), and PREDICTABLY she is endangered by further harrowing incarceration as she appeared on trial 3 weeks last Sunday at Iran’s Revolutionary Court, on new charges of “spreading propaganda against the system/ regime” (she reiterated her strong denial of the charge on spreading propaganda – simply repeat allegations of activity previously aired at her previous trial before the same judge who had found her guilty 5 years ago) and harrowingly still awaits verdict/sentence [another 5 years perhaps? – this trial must be condemned as illegitimate (secret trials are against international law, even aside from her diplomatic protection!]. After the court hearing on March 14 (so a good month ago!), Nazanin was told she would hear whether she’d be convicted of this second set of anti-regime charges in around 7 working days (a falsehood designed to further extend her torture and torment), but this period had coincided with New Year celebrations in Iran – and Nazanin’s husband Richard correctly predicted that it would not be resolved until after Easter! He now claims that return to her family in West Hampstead could be further delayed by new negotiations over the Iran nuclear deal – she will be held as leverage while the JCPOA negotiations continue). Meanwhile Redress, an organisation working with torture victims, has sent an independent 77-page medical report to the UK’s foreign secretary Dominic Raab that it had commissioned from the IRCT – BUT NO EFFECTIVE ACTION HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE FOREIGN OFFICE YET THOUGH, NOR EVER BY THE UK GOVERNMENT. [Perhaps, withdraw our diplomats, arrest their Ambassador [NOTE in an extremely rare diplomatic and legal move the British government gave Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe formal diplomatic protection in 2019, but that status has simply been ignored and discounted by Iran with zero response from the UK -WHY?], expelling the other Iranian diplomats, cancelling ALL Iran citizens’ visas, and prohibiting direct flights between UK and Iran (Qatar Airways, Oman Air, Kish Air, IranAir, Iran Aseman Airlines, Iran Air Tours, Air Arabia and Mahan Air all fly direct to Iran) might have a greater effect than Boris Johnson’s recent phone call with the Iranian president Hassan Rouhani and his inane pronouncement that “Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe must be released immediately”, eh?]

The UK government should inform Iran and immediately pay financial compensation to Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe and her family for her arrest, custody, torture, inhuman treatment, lack of access to due process or medical treatment, and retention in Iran, using the £400million owed by the UK to Iran within the framework of an arms contract signed before the 1979 Islamic Revolution – say at a rate of £1,000 per hour of past or future incarceration or physical retention in Iran, which currently would amount to some £45 million [so about 11% of Iran’s held money].

[Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe, worked as a project manager at the Thomson Reuters Foundation and her life transformed dreadfully on April 3, 2016. She was arrested with her daughter, Gabriella, then not yet 2 years old, at Tehran’s Imam Khomeini Airport. She was a British-Iranian aid worker, who had travelled to Iran to visit her family for Nowruz, the Iranian New Year. She was on her way back to the UK when she was arrested and accused of “plotting to overthrow the Islamic regime” – a ridiculous charge vehemently denied. She was then separated from her daughter, whose British passport was confiscated, and sent to prison – it was the start of a long ordeal for the young mother, marked by harsh stays in solitary confinement in windowless cells, blindfolded interrogations and hunger strikes to demand medical care. In November 2016, Amnesty International raised an alert that Zaghari-Ratcliffe’s severe detention conditions were driving her to contemplate suicide].

Also the UK needs to immediately withdraw permittance of dual nationality, as it is in the UK’s interest not to confer dual citizenship on UK-nationals and this is a concession with dangerous implications as dual citizenship means dual loyalty/responsibility, and in times of strained bilateral relations between the two countries, a person’s loyalty would be suspect [eg during Second World War, when United States went to war with Japan, there were 40,000 Japanese living in the United States, some had taken US Citizenship]; the UK currently allows dual citizenship, which means its nationals are in most cases allowed to have citizenship of another country at the same time. However, not all countries permit dual nationality. Some countries, for example, may regard you as having lost your nationality once you are granted British citizenship. Dual citizenship gives an excuse that allows regimes like that of Iran (which does not recognise dual nationality) to unfairly detain and charge innocent individuals who then cannot be properly protected by the UK or their other state [Iran’s other jailed dual nationals and their uncertain fate: some of the most prominent are Ahmadreza Djalali (Iran-Sweden)/ Morad Tahbaz (Iran-UK-US)/ Kamran Ghaderi (Iran-Austria)/ Fariba Adelkhah (Iran-France)/ Anoosheh Ashoori (Iran-UK)/ Massud Mossaheb (Iran-Austria)/ Nahid Taghavi (Iran-Germany)]

  • For example also, Russian oligarchs are allowed to flaunt their stolen state assets in Britain. Such London Russian oligarchs should not be mistaken for conventional, self-made businessmen – their riches come from transactions with the Russian government. They either sold something for a fortune to the state of Russia or they bought something for pennies in some sort of privatisation from the state of Russia. Russian assets should be frozen in Britain to make sure oligarchs can’t profit from their crimes and BRITAIN should freeze assets for Russian oligarchs in the UK since the country is suspected to be behind the poisoning of an ex-spy – Foreign Affairs Chairman since 2017 Tom Tugenhat has said Britain needs to be targeting Russia where it hurts them – in their wallets.

“The Elephant In The Room” – the ‘Stench of Sleaze’, and Boris Johnson’s Government in ‘Real Trouble’(updated 18/06/2021)

SEE ALSO ASSOCIATED POST: Prime Minister Boris Johnson, just another victim of the Pandemic – a busted flush with his bolt now well and truly shot?

This situation occurs following a number of “massive errors” of judgement during the coronavirus pandemic – it has been a catalogue of ineptitude on an industrial scale and that’s why there needed to be a full formal PUBLIC inquiry [as now committed, and not a farcical cross party so called ‘set of joint hearings’, led by Jeremy Hunt an ex-Health Secretary with massive personal guilt to hide on the issue).

The latest fiasco show of pandemic incompetence from the government, which has already substantially derailed the planned lifting of lockdown restrictions on 21 June (delayed 4 weeks) and cause serious disruption (although the UK was aiming to take a drastic step to save summer by ramping-up vaccination to one million people per day in a desperate race to check the spread of the Indian variant, and as part of a drive to beat it), is its failure to close the UK borders (madness) to this novel highly transmissible Indian DELTA variant [(B1.617.2.), (though known about as early as February), which perhaps is 50% more transmissible than the Kent variation, so is likely to cause a significant surge in the UK and come to dominate here], and which has already annihilated the Indian subcontinent (in May 4,000 cases a DAY in India alone)]. That comes notwithstanding the government admitting it had conducted a secret, unpublished and withheld review of ‘lessons that needed to be learned’ from past mistakes particularly those that cost lives (which of course included not closing our borders at the start of the pandemic) – the UK is an island so it is relatively easy to stop unwanted potentially virus infected visitors entering here, isn’t it? Well, despite the extremely worrying dangers posed by this variant, what transpired was that once again Boris Johnson dithered, this time over blocking visitors from India when the problem became self-evident from a major Covid spike in that Country, and moreover the variant was not even seen as relevant nor significant so was NOT designated as a variant of concern until much too late on May 7,(double madness). Nevertheless, responding to the surge in infections, the British government on April 9 placed Pakistan and Bangladesh because they have a land border with India [which also has borders with China, Bhutan, Nepal, and Myanmar (formerly Burma)], so therefore obviously were at serious risk of virus variant migration, WERE added to the ‘red list’ governing UK entry on a deemed ‘jokeborder policy (according to former chief Johnson advisor Cummings), followed by its ‘flawed’ isolation processes, BUT not India itself the actual epicentre of the variant (treble madness).

[Indian variant in UK – Indian variant accounted for 1.7% of positive cases in Britain by April 10, up from 0.2% at the end of March. Majority of the infections with the B.1.617 variant are understood to have been in returning travellers

It was not clear to what extent the mutant strain was spreading inside the UK but cases had risen sharply – Coronavirus: UK rate of Indian Covid variant had spiked EIGHT-FOLD in a fortnight as cases surged to 400 and PHE confirmed there are THREE types of the strain]

However, as of early June 2021, the Indian variant (as predicted) is indeed now the dominant strain in UK after a 79% rise in just a week with 12,431 cases now confirmed. The immediate impact has been a UK decision to downgrade Portugal from green to amber as airline bosses speak of travel list outrage. The holiday hotspot, including the islands of Madeira and the Azores, has been removed from the green list exempting the need to quarantine on return from 4am on Tuesday 8th June. [People returning to the UK from Portugal will be required to self-isolate at home for 10 days as part of coronavirus restrictions – many holidaymakers in Portugal had faced a scramble for flights home before the new rules were introduced].

But why all this bloody madness then – doubtless because Boris Johnson was planning at that time a trade mission to India (subsequently it had to be cancelled on April 18 due to virus concerns) and not disrupting that was a higher priority for him than NOT ALLOWING ENTRY of the Indian variant (B1.617.2.) into this Country, eh? Well, flights from India were allowed for a whole MONTH before the red list ban despite rising variant cases there and here (another “reckless failure” to protect Britain’s borders). Well, the result was that understandably people in India who were able and had family or contacts here, headed for the UK as a safe haven. [Reportedly there was a 250 per cent rise in searches for flights from India to the UK. THOUSANDS of passengers arrived in Britain from INDIA during this period. While thirty flights usually arrive into the UK from India every week, airline operators asked to operate an extra eight flights from the country to cope with the surge in demand. Despite the projected devastating impact of the Indian variant on the UK’s war against the virus a thousand people are STILL arriving in Britain EVERY day from India – so thousands upon thousands of visitors almost certainly carrying that strain and their infection may go undetected by quarantine procedures, and ALL allowed without hindrance to travel to ALL the Indian enclaves throughout the UK which has ensured widespread transmission.

The utter proof that our border policy is still INADEQUATE is clearly now self-evident as it transpires that a maritime loophole allowed some 600 cruise ship workers from India to fly here and avoid compulsory hotel quarantine [it was only closed after worried civil servants raised the alarm, amid fears that the Indian Covid variant would delay lockdown ending – those 600 cruise ship employees travelled from NOW red-list” India through Heathrow on May 13 and 14 and were NOT put into immediate ten-day isolation at hotels, and instead, the arrivals — mostly Indian nationals with some Filipinos — were classed as seafarers; and as such, they were allowed to go to ports, including Southampton, under a rule designed to stop Naval ratings having to quarantine. However, the loophole was shut on May 19 after concerns were raised with Transport Secretary Grant Shapps by furious civil servants. Cruise crew travelling from red-list countries such as India must NOW quarantine in airport hotels]. So in reality there was ‘NO PROPER CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS’ and it’s scandalous and shocking that such a loophole ever existed which does mean we are facing lockdown for even longer, eh? Then of course we see the ridiculous situation whereby the government announced that Portugal was controversially been taken off the UK’s “green list” of destinations from which people can return to England WITHOUT having to quarantine – Portugal was removed from the government’s green travel list from Tuesday 8th June when the changes came into effect at 04:00 BST, amid rising coronavirus cases and concern over a “Nepal mutation of the so-called Indian variant”, while seven others (Egypt, Costa Rica, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan, Bahrain, Sudan, and Trinidad & Tobago) join the red list with the toughest travel rules – people arriving in the UK from these destinations will be required to stay in a quarantine hotel for 10 days at a fixed cost of £1,750 per adult. Portugal itself will now join the amber list, meaning holidaymakers should NOT visit and returnees must ISOLATE for 10 days. We have therefore a bizarre situation whereby furious holidaymaker Britons in Portugal were scrambling to get back to the UK to beat the quarantine deadline and faced paying hundreds of pounds more for earlier flights – they said they felt ‘ashamed to be British’ as they raced back home from Portugal to dodge amber list restrictions with hours to spare. This meant that those back on UK soil at 4am on 8th June from Portugal are supposed to be no jeopardy whatsoever to our Country’s battle against coronavirus, but someone just a minute later from the exact same place and circumstance, or indeed family, are deemed to be a serious pandemic risk to the UK so needed to self-isolate – where’s the LOGIC, SCIENCE or BORDER CONTROL policy in any of that, eh?

Meanwhile, due to India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s allowance of reckless rallies and large scale traditional religious gatherings, accompanied by a scandalous lack of social distancing measures, and combined with a pitiful low vaccination rate, India experienced a devastating surge in cases towards the end of March which is believed to have been driven by the emergence of the variant. Cases in the country more than trebled from 72,330 on March 31 to 217,353 on April 15 as the situation spiralled into a humanitarian catastrophe with hospitals completely overwhelmed by Covid patients combined with inadequate life saving facilities and oxygen (daily death toll has risen to over 4000 and new daily infections to over a quarter million and had surged to 400,000 plus because of the new variant – and uncontrolled numbers of people from India are still entering the UK).

Here, AT LEAST 122 passengers arriving from Mumbai and Delhi between the end of March and April 26 WERE carrying the strain – though it was not designated a “variant of concern” until May 7. Anyone arriving from India during this period should have had to self-isolate but could have done so AT HOME (unsupervised so non-compliance very likely) rather than in a government-approved quarantine hotel (more controlled so compliance ensured)

In direct consequence to Johnson two months ago allowing the Indian stain to arrive and get a hold in the UK we found it resulted in spots where the Indian Delta variant became proportionally dominant in cases sequenced – like South Northamptonshire (76.9%), Blackburn with Darwen (55.7%), Bolton (55.3%), Bedford (53.8%), likely resulting from substantial Indian origin populations – virus infected by the thousands of visitors escaping from India during Johnson’s April’s UK open borders. Coronavirus cases in England are doubling now ever 10 days, so by 21 June we can expect to see some 15,000 reported cases a day and in another week we will see perhaps the 25,000 cases/day as previously seen at the peak of the November lockdown in England (when more than a thousand deaths were taking place each day).

Hence, we might now see some 9,000 additional unwarranted deaths for which  BORIS JOHNSON will be accountable, so he should immediately be CHARGED with MANSLAUGHTER for ‘irresponsibly’ allowing-in the new Delta variant here, when this variant according to latest Imperial modelling could cause a significant THIRD wave of hospitalisations and deaths on a similar scale to the WINTER wave [The researchers say that the immune escape properties of the Delta variant would affect the magnitude of a THIRD wave MORE than assumptions about TRANSMISSIBILITY – moreover, the team estimate that the current level of transmission, the effective reproduction number (R), is approximately just 0.8 for  the Alpha variant  but significantly much higher at “1.5” for  the Delta variant  in England, with an overall “R number of around  “1.4” across both variants]. The danger is that the UK R number will go through the roof if action isn’t taken

Together with the murky stench of corruption around the Tories we now have the furore over alleged Tory sleaze concerning PPE secret VIP fast-track contracts for cronies and the PM’s lobbying habits involving the Dyson texts about ventilator manufacture [which may have broken the ministerial code], but that totally ignores the elephant in the room, which is WHY was there EVER a CRISIS over these two pandemic issues in 2020 of the early days of it – and the answer is a damming indictment of recent Conservative governments, isn’t it?

YES, because some 4 years BEFORE the pandemic ever existed, it was KNOWN by government that if one came along there WOULD BE a crisis regarding PPE & Ventilators, as well as inadequate numbers of ICU beds, resulting in an unprecedented DEATH toll [indeed so far it has killed nearly one hundred and thirty thousand people in the UK] under Exercise Cygnus the NHS and authorities had conducted a test of their joint ability to cope with a flue like pandemic and the RESULT was utter FAILURE, as the NHS could NOT actually cope [UK reaction– government made the conscious decision that the UK would do NOTHING and simply let any pandemic ‘overwhelm’ the Country (as it did!). Britain just assumed a deadly virus would cripple the NHS (the assumption that a new virus could NOT be contained is also explicitly stated in the governments pandemic strategy documents)]. The decision was taken to simply WAIT until there WAS a PANDEMIC and THEN only act to increase MORTUARY capacity. NHS hospitals, local authorities and major government departments were included in the Cygnus operation that took place in October 2016 [in office Tory PM Theresa May, Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt, Chief Medical Officer Professor Dame Sally Davies]. Ministers were briefed on the results of Cygnus, which had revealed those significant gaps in the NHS “surge capacity” resultant in the NHS being stretched beyond breaking point. [Jeremy Hunt In 2018, became the longest-serving Health Secretary in British political history (so what’s his excuse for failure on this one, not least since the NHS already had visibility and the experience of the genetically similar SARS virus pandemic a decade BEFORE he was actually in post); later that year he then even got promoted to Foreign Secretary no less, the 3rd Great Office of State, but he now chairs the Health & Social Care Select Committee – so he is well placed to whitewash his incompetence in running the NHS, the CYGNUS fiasco, and the resulting lack of action to prepare for a pandemic, so has he direct responsibility for what is now approaching 130,000 deaths in the UK, do you think? [this May, Mr Hunt – who now admits HE was too slow to boost the NHS workforce – was already engaged in just such a COVER-UP (for example blaming the omission of testing importance in the Cygnus report for the non-suppression of Covid – when it’s results were simply ignored anyway- together with ‘collective failure’ for the Country being underprepared for a Sars like pandemic) AND he will lead (he has got HIMSELF jointly chairing) the cross-party investigation into government messaging and wider preparedness for a pandemic]’

[In a rare set of joint hearings, the Commons health committee, led by Jeremy Hunt (ex-Health Secretary), and the science committee, chaired by Greg Clark (ex-Business Secretary), are to hear from witnesses in the hope of producing a report by the spring – the pair of Conservative former ministers have announced they are to lead a rapid, cross-party investigation into the UK’s handling of the coronavirus crisis]

In another scandalous pandemic judgement matter by the current government, we have the ludicrous situation whereby it has only just finally decided that ‘Adult Care Home’ workers, looking after elderly, hugely vulnerable people, DO have to be mandatorily vaccinated to protect their residents and avoid further deaths there (particularly since PHE has reported that in 2020 (January to October) 43,398 COVID patients were sent into UK care homes in events that led to over 150,000 deaths in outbreaks potentially seeded from hospital-acquired infections) – one would have expected that basic requirement for vaccination as now available to be self-evident, but apparently not so with Johnson’s shower in charge of health (including hapless/hopeless Hancock), eh? [but bizarrely they only reached that conclusion of Covid compulsory vaccination action (or of course having an appropriate exemption) regarding England’s care home staff, after a wasteful lengthy consultation process (launched in April) – some 1.5 million people work in social care in England while shamefully more than 50,000 carers (3%) currently remain unvaccinated but more worryingly a THIRD of care home staff in some London areas have NOT had a Covid jab (workers are expected to be given 16 weeks to have the jab or face being redeployed away from front-line care or potentially lose their job)].

Moreover, a similar decision regarding hospital nurses and other NHS staff having mandatory Covid vaccination is still pending (and we will await yet another wasteful lengthy consultation process BEFORE a decision), which is even more weird when one considers that for decades it HAS been an implied and enforced requirement (i.e. via guidance not law) for doctors and healthcare staff doing certain exposure prone procedures to have an up to date Hepatitis B virus vaccination (Hepatitis B is an infection of the liver and is spread in blood and bodily fluids) and that sets a clear precedent for requiring ALL relevant hospital workers to now have the Covid-19 vaccine, considering the very high transmission risks of that particular new virus, which has caused a worldwide pandemic

The latest humiliating shock for Boris Johnson and his government came mid-June (Thurs 17th) when the LibDems no less with 56.7% of the vote scored a stunning by-election victory over the Conservatives at Chesham And Amersham which is one of the so-called ‘Blue Wall’ of Tory southern seats. This involved a huge 25% swing against the Conservatives [they lost by 8,028 votes when their majority was of over 16,000 and they had taken 55% of the vote at the last election), in what was expected to be a rock solid ultra safe seat, indeed held by them since its very inception nearly 50 years ago – a truly dramatic demonstration that the Conservatives have lost the trust and understanding of the voters at least in that constituency – it’s said that the Party has taken people across the Country for granted for far too long! This result will ring alarm bells at Tory headquarters (CCHQ) at a time when the Tories are losing their ‘well-off’ traditional voters as they focus on cementing gains in the largely BREXIT supporting ‘Red-Wall’ former Labour working class areas. (Nevertheless Johnson claims that the Tories were NOT neglecting the south in favour of the north, eh?)

Senior Tories have warned Prime Minister Boris Johnson to change course or risk the LibDems becoming the ‘natural party for home counties’, and have told him ‘30 or 40 seatsin the south are vulnerable whence the political map does begin to change

However, that spectacular by-election result in the Chilterns will bring no comfort whatsoever to Labour nor its 2020 new leader Keir Starmer as Labour trailed in a bad fourth (behind the Greens even) with a derisory 622 votes on a turnout of 37,954 (only 1.6% of the vote instead of 5% minimum, so a £500 LOST DEPOSIT into the bargain) – and that’s on top of Labour crashing to an equally humiliating as Johnson’s loss, by-election defeat in Hartlepool last year with the seat lost to the Tories by 6,940 votes involving a swing from Labour of almost 16% – the party’s former heartland town elected a Conservative MP for the first time in 62 years(and it is only the second time in nearly 40 years that a governing party has taken a seat from the opposition).

The other week, a bitter Dominic Cummings published a blog that set out some extraordinary charges against Boris Johnson his former boss. Cummings may himself be a man of questionable integrity, but he was Johnson’s most senior adviser during a critical period of national emergency and his damning claims ought to be thoroughly investigated. There are two main claims (see below), either of which if true could be sufficient to spell the end of Johnson as Prime Minister.

Well Boris Johnson has form when it comes to breaking or being accused of breaching the ministerial code but basically he has got away with it: allegedly like when using a Downing Street press room Covid briefing to make an unprompted political attack on London labour Mayor Sadiq Khan over LfT finances (accused him of blowing a “black hole” in it by a fare freeze); or in 2019 his registration of financial interests [Mr Johnson who was not yet prime minister at the time previously fell foul of the ministerial code when the cross-party parliamentary committee for standards carried out an inquiry into registrations and found that he was late to register financial interests on two properties (three months late in registering joint ownership of a property in London in 2017, and 11 months late registering his shared interest in a property in Somerset in 2019) – the report said: “Should we conclude in future that Mr Johnson has committed any further breaches of the rules on registration, we will regard this as a matter which may call for more serious sanction”; it is also suggested that Mr Johnson may have breached the code when he exchanged WhatsApp messages with James Dyson and offered to “fix” some tax affairs as Mr Dyson’s company built ventilators to assist with the Covid response].

First claim: Dominic Cummings alleges that Johnson tried to put a stop to a government inquiry that he as Prime Minister had ordered into who leaked the cabinet decision to impose a second national lockdown last November before an official announcement. This was a highly damaging leak that resulted in a media frenzy and confused public health communications at a time when people’s lives depended on receiving clear and reliable information from the government. Cummings claims that Johnson wanted to call off the inquiry because he feared it would expose Henry Newman a special adviser to Michael Gove, and a very close friend of his fiancée Carrie Symonds, as the SOURCE. (The decision on the second lockdown last autumn was leaked and is the subject of an inquiry to find the so-called “chatty rat” who tipped off the press). Mr Simon Case CVO, the UK’s most senior civil servant, who has served as Cabinet Secretary and Head of the Home Civil Service since 9 September 2020, and previously served as Downing Street Permanent Secretary to Prime Minister Boris Johnson from May 2020, declined to say whether Mr Cummings (accused of being Downing Street ‘Chatty Rat’ leaker) had been cleared over that leak, as the former ally has claimed when striking back at allegations from within No 10, while Henry Newman has been the target of a whispering campaign designed to put him under suspicion of being the “chatty rat” before. In November allegations circulated to at least four newspapers said that he tried to cover his tracks by partially wiping his phone.

Regarding conservative think tank The Bow Group’s calls for an independent inquiry into Carrie Symonds’ influence in No 10 and her “possible influence” in government, as No 10 needed to clarify her position after reports in the media that she was “taking a central role in running the country” [it’s said that government policy is no longer made by the PM in Cabinet with Ministers but now by the PM in Pillow talk with Carrie Symonds!].


  • Symonds *[nicknamed as ‘Princess Nuts Nuts’ OR Sir Say) is a British political activist, conservationist, and was then the new fiancée (but now third wife) of the then ‘still married’ (to his second wife, Marina Wheeler) Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Boris Johnson. She is the first unmarried partner of a prime minister to reside at 10 Downing Street. She works as a senior advisor to ocean conservation charity Oceana and beforehand in 2018 was the Conservative Party’s head of communications for a year before she was terminated.

*[It has been claimed that Cummings’ crew of “Brexit Boys” had referred to Ms Symonds as “Princess Nuts Nuts” behind her back and by Brexit youth groups as Sir Say! – pronounced “SAIR” and a reference to the dominant character in medieval fantasy television series Game of Thrones (the series follows a civil war for the Iron Throne of the continent of Westeros, fought between the rival royal and noble families and their respective supporters) so not to be confused with a real but deceased John Say, who died 1478, an English courtier, MP and Speaker of the House of Commons].

  • Dominic Cummings, the brains behind Boris Johnson’s BREXIT campaign and his long time spin doctor, left his job as Johnson’s chief of staff at Number 10 Downing Street last November as Mr Johnson feared he and communications director Lee Cain as prospective new chief of staff  would ‘poison the well’ if they were allowed to remain in their jobs until the New Year as Cummings for himself  initially planned, after it was reported he lost a huge bitter power struggle engulfing the cabinet in a turf war between aides and Mr Johnson’s fiancée Carrie Symonds, who was seeming acting as an unofficial SPAD (Special Advisor) – she obviously though couldn’t be a regular salaried ‘civil servant’ since her role is one of providing sexual services to the PM so she couldn’t actually be also paid as that would make her a prostitute and No 10 a brothel, wouldn’t it?

The PM’s then fiancée, is seen as a person of ‘unelected power’ as she appears to enjoy huge influence in the hiring and firing of No 10 staff and in policy making, is accused of trying to ‘run the government by WhatsApp‘ from the No11 flat, but allies of Ms Symonds have unbelievably insisted she is the victim of sexism

However, a row broke out this April over allegations that SHE ‘wanted George Eustice ENVIRONMENT SECRETARY since February 2020, sacked’ by her PM lover because she thinks that Eustice was too close to the farming lobby, so was not taking sufficient action on animal welfare (even if she’s right on the fact, what has it got to do with her who’s in post, eh?).

Reportedly, it also turns out she insisted that Allegra Stratton, a former television journalist and ‘FoC’ (Friend of Carrie) be hired in 2020 (£125,000 a year salary) to deliver press briefings from Number 10’s proposed new flash media suite, despite the official recruitment process selecting a different candidate to front the briefings but that person was nobbled to appease Ms Symonds, who wanted Ms Stratton to take the job to offset the ‘laddish’ atmosphere which she said prevailed at the time in No 10 – in the aftermath, Johnson just said, “I DIDN’T think you would find someone BETTER. Sorry, it has to be Allegra otherwise Carrie will go f******* crackers”

Beguiling Boris is even further in the mire as his Mustique holiday is being probed by the House of Commons standards watchdog – Kathryn Stone, the parliamentary standards commissioner, is looking at the PM’s declaration of a £15,000 luxury break he took with Carrie Symonds in early 2020 over claims he may have broken rules in the way he declared a new year holiday in the Caribbean, which he registered as had been provide by the Conservative party donor David Ross, co-founder of Carphone Warehouse, but in February 2020 a spokesman for Ross reported that David Ross  did NOT pay any monies whatsoever for this – so WHO did and WHAT was promised or expected in return for such generosity, eh?

Just when it looked as if things couldn’t get worse for Boris Johnson’s reputation and financial management, we find out that he had been served with a CCJ ( County court judgment), as first revealed by Private Eye, over a £535 unpaid debt [A County court judgment puts the Prime Minister at potential risk of a bad credit rating and potential enforcement action by bailiffs arriving at Downing Street.]

  • The official register of county court judgments for England and Wales shows that Johnson had a judgment against him in October last year (so well over 30 days) over an unpaid debt of £535. The register does NOT give details of to WHOM the debt is owed.
  • The judgment, issued on 26 October, is for the online county court, whereby people owed a debt can seek recompense through a web-based form, rather than having to attend court. It is listed as an “unsatisfied record”, meaning it had STILL not been paid.
  • County court judgments are a LATE point in a process of seeking redress for a debt, indicating the Prime Minister would most likely have been contacted via post SEVERAL TIMES earlier, asking him to repay the debt.
  • Unless a debt incurring a county court judgment is paid within 30 days, it is placed on someone’s CREDIT record for six years, making it much more difficult to get loans or mortgages. A creditor can also apply to the County Court for a bailiff to collect the debt or even apply to the High Court for enforcement officers to attend Johnson the First Lord of the Treasury in Downing Street and recover money OR remove goods.

The news will increase scrutiny of how Johnson was able to afford to pay for a refurbishment of his Downing Street flat ( reportedly cost up to £200,000) for which he is believed to have paid partly via a loan. (The Electoral Commission of course has already begun an inquiry into how the work was funded, saying there were “reasonable grounds” to suspect multiple offences may have been committed).

The relatively small amount of the debt for which the judgment was issued indicates it is likely to have happened through disorganisation rather than an inability to pay. (However, Johnson has previously had to apologise to MPs for the late declaration of more than £52,000 in income).

It turns out that Yvonne Hobbs, 59 from Leicestershire is a Covid conspiracy theorist who won a county court judgment against Boris Johnson for ‘defaming her’ is an is ‘an eccentric loner’ according to her neighbours – Downing Street as at 13 May has had the claim struck out. Downing Street believes the claim is completely bogus and the CCJ should not have been issued [Defamation cases are meant to be dealt with by senior judges in the High Court, so questions will be asked about why the claim was approved by the online small claims court].

2. Second claim: Dominic Cummings also says that the prime minister sought to get donors to pay for £58,000 of renovations to his Downing Street flat in plans that were “unethical, foolish, possibly illegal and almost certainly broke the rules on proper disclosure of political donations”. Like all prime ministers, Johnson has a £30,000 annual allowance for the upkeep and refurbishment of his official residence under government rules, but it seems this generous allowance was not enough for Carrie Symondsunctuous snobby plans and demands for the costly luxury refurbishment of his four-bedroomed Downing Street flat accommodation at No11 (said to have cost as much as £200,000 as the couple apparently wanted to transform the flat from Mr Johnson’s predecessor Theresa May’sJohn Lewis furniture nightmare” (as described by the then pregnant Ms Symonds who is said to have the taste for Champaign but the budget for Lemonade nevertheless spearheaded the opulent refurbishment) into a “high society haven” (even though John Lewis furniture is aspirational and out of reach for very many people in this country so the pair somewhat insult 90% of British people while the flat latest revamp included wallpaper that cost £840 a roll and a sofa that set him back £9,800 and when also she used the services of mega stars customers and royalty connected leading interior design guru Lulu Lytle, who co-founded the exclusive decorating company Sloane Britain (based on London’s ultimate design street, Pimlico Road) – furthermore an astounding previous total of £200,000 had been spent on just refurbishing, the four-bedroom residence alone by former leaders over the past 24 years). It’s further alleged that Tory donor Lord David Brownlow of Shurlock Row [a British entrepreneur, philanthropist, and one of the Tory Party’s biggest donors (giving the party £714,690 in 2017 – given a life peerage two years later by Theresa May in 2019), also Vice-Chairman of the Conservative Party between 2017 and 2020] said he had given £58,000 to cover payments “the party has already made”). It is now said that Boris Johnson was shamed into paying the £58,000 bill for the Downing Street refurbishment himself after the Tory Party settled it then tried to disguise the truth and indeed Johnson has since stated that he has actually personally met the cost of the redecoration without saying when (rumoured to be perhaps a commercial loan AND a No 10 aide who remains loyal to Johnson said simply: “The bottom line is that he can’t afford to be prime minister because despite his £150,000 a year salary and other earnings/income (so just scraping by really on £157,372 pay plus £23,514 in book royalties equalling some £181 thousand in total – then also he owns a 20% stake in a Somerset property and 50% in a London home with a combined rental income of at least £10,000) it isn’t enough” [for ‘Bonking Boris’ you see it’s an expensive business having two ex-wives, supporting four of his six legitimate children (sources say) and perhaps begetting an unspecified number of other children from multiple rumoured extramarital affairs, as well as running a spendthrift mistress/now fiancée with expensive tastes who he currently resides with in Downing Street together with his one year old boy love child. However, he now faces months of painful inquiries, while the Tory party itself is currently under investigation (has been since March) by the Electoral Commission over the works the PM carried out to No11, whether a donation it received to initially pay the bill was appropriately declared and has said there were “reasonable grounds to suspect that an offence or offences may have occurred” (Boris Johnson ‘broke electoral law’ IF he FAILED to DECLARE any donation for flat makeover within one month when the claims are that the Conservative Party secretly approved and secretly paid the £58,000 bill as long as nine months ago – the payment were then covered by a Tory donor, according to a leaked email).

Whereby now it’s interesting to find that in fact BREXIT backing tycoon William Hobhouse and his heiress wife were two major shareholders in the posh firm Sloane Britain when Carrie and Boris employed its expensive services in their flat’s luxury makeover. It turns out though that they are also embroiled in the current objectionable system whereby wealthy bankrolling individuals can buy access to government Ministers and entitlement to have a domineering voice on the leader’s credentials – the Hobhouses being past Conservative and Vote Leave Party donors of over £200,000 no less -including his £63,000 to Tory HQ in 2009 and £23,500 to the Vote Leave campaign in 2016, with his wife herself donating another £131,400 to the Tories between 2009 and 2014.

For someone who has absolutely nothing to hide, it seems strange that millionaire Hobhouse, who of course stood to benefit from the cash paid for costly flat makeover, is somewhat shy of being involved in the inquiry of the PM’s conduct, or any kind of investigation, and has tried to obliterate his involvement and indeed erase his links with Sloane by quitting his role after 6 years when questions first surfaced two months ago about the costly refurbishment and no such association with it appear on his CV either despite numerous other roles being included. Furthermore his resignation as a Director of Sloane was recorded by Companies House just two days AFTER it emerged that the Electoral Commission itself was probing how the gilded and pricey flat makeover was paid for, eh? Besides, it is unknown if or to who he transferred his shares upon his resignation from the company.

Regarding then the sordid matter of UK Party Funding and big money influence in politics, we have seen scandal after scandal over the years including Labour’s Cash for Honours’ crisis, and the Liberal Democrats being caught arranging a private meeting with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury for a potentially illegal donor, haven’t we? It has been suggested by a House of Lords senior appointee that many donors would expect an honour in return for their finance and that you cannot get away from the fact that the word ‘peerage’ is connected to LARGE donations [there’s no such thing as a free lunch as something has to be promised in return, eh?].

Furthermore regarding the Prime Minister, a few weeks ago in an increasingly vitriolic and damaging revenge spat by the former top aide Dominic Cummings, who knows where all the bodies are buried, suggested the government was too slow to close the borders when the PANDEMIC started. He said the scientific consensus that travel bans would not help prevent the spread of Covid-19 was flawed [he said in response to a tweet about how Vietnam had protected its borders it was a “very important issue re learning from the disaster”].

Mr Cummings himself has now given evidence last month to a joint committee of MPs investigating the government’s response to the coronavirus crisis and according to for example Sunday Times reports, he was preparing a bombshell dossier that attempts to blame the Prime Minister for thousands of deaths during the pandemic, claiming he had pushed the prime minister hard without success to lock down SOONER in the autumn and he has lots of evidence that shows that the PMs decision to delay led to devastating consequences. In the latest allegation made in the Daily Mail (unattributed but could be Cummings) the PM is accused of telling aides he would rather let coronavirus “rip” than impose a second lockdown, and a growing number of sources were reported to have told how Mr Johnson on more than one occasion said he was prepared to let “bodies pile high” rather than order a third shutdown, but predictably the Prime Minister said that allegation was “total rubbish” and unsurprisingly publicly denies the phrase was uttered at all, while Downing Street said the allegations are “gross distortions” of the Prime Minister’s position last year. Contradicting that, Robert Preston Political Editor of ITV News said that two separate people had corroborated the claims to him and has suggested there are at least three sources who allegedly heard Johnson make the comment. . In terms of credibility also, and if is it actually true (?) the story was written-up originally by renowned political journalist Simon Walters, winner of four British Press Awards, and now assistant editor at the Daily Mail (so it would be wise to take it seriously and take into account as well that Boris Johnson is the person who ‘inappropriately’  joked in early March last year during a conference call with over 60 manufacturing businesses about the effort to procure & build 20,000 additional more ventilators in such a short time frame being a scheme to be called “Operation Last Gasp”). Britain has suffered one of the worst death rates in the world from Covid-19, with repeated delays and dithering over the introduction of lockdown measures blamed, and reportedly now allies say Dominic Cummings, in revenge for his political demise orchestrated by Boris Johnson’s concubine (but now upgraded to wife in a secret May bank holiday wedding) Carrie Symonds, planned to ‘napalm’ Boris (a threat he carried out to the full) at the parliamentary committee hearing on the Wednesday of end of May week, when the former adviser was grilled by MPs over the government’s handling of Covid-19. He emerged as a credible witness after an uncharacteristic mea culpa (an acknowledgement of his fault or error) as he regretted not “hitting the panic button” earlier over a flawed initial reaction to the coronavirus outbreak which could have cost 500,000 lives. Though as expected, there was a catalogue of criticism of Johnson when Cummings regarded him as “unfit for the job” and it was “completely crackers” he had become prime minister.

Apparently at the outset in February 2020 (according to Cummings) Johnson dismissed Covid as just a “scare story” like the “new swine flu” and, incredibly, even suggested he should be injected with the virus live on television by Chris Whitty, the chief medical officer. He said Johnson changed his mind 10 times a day and contradicted his own policy day after day; he was “like a shopping trolley” crashing from one side of the aisle to the other.

His most serious charge was that Johnson overruled his advisers to delay last autumn’s second lockdown. This really matters because more people died in the second wave than the first and Cummings launched a tirade against his former boss about the Government originally intention to let coronavirus spread through the country and just rip through the community in an attempt to build “herd immunity” (the initial Covid strategy was ‘herd immunity by September’ and the idea was only abandoned in early March after Downing Street was warned it would lead to a “catastrophe”). No 10 has repeatedly denied it pursued the controversial tactic of allowing Covid-19 to spread unchecked whence the loyal liars have of course already been trotted out in support of Johnson to denied Dominic Cummings’ claim that the government originally tried to pursue a “herd immunity” strategy in response to Covid-19 – like Home Secretary, Priti Patel, who insisted it had “absolutely not” been the original policy, but is one who owed Boris big time for keeping her in office after she had been found by Standards chief Sir Alex Allan to have broken the ministerial code. Then also there’s Dr Jenny Harries Deputy Chief Medical Officer for England from June 2019 to April 2021 who said she had “never been in a government meeting where herd immunity was put forward as a mechanism of control” for the pandemic, but is one who also owes Johnson a massive favour for her promotion effective 1 April 2021, when she was appointed as the first chief executive of the new UK Health Security Agency, which combines Public Health England and NHS Test and Trace [that despite her causing massive public confusion over the benefits of facemasks when government rules stated masks must be worn on public transport, in hospitals and in many shops, as well as leisure facilities such as cinemas (but not pubs or restaurants), eh?]

Those of us who have followed and written about the pandemic during the past year know full well that herd immunity WAS INDEED government official policy and was clearly stated at the time (to the aghast of the WHO, indeed), so how these storytellers expect to be believed is now incredible and completely baffling!

Dominic Cummings has equally blasted claims to the contrary about a herd immunity strategy by Health Secretary Matt Hancock so has accused him of spreading “bull****” – and indeed Cummings’ most damning remarks were reserved for the health secretary, whom he accused of being “completely incapable of doing the job”. Remarkably, Cummings said there were at least 15-20 times when Hancock should have been fired, a view he claimed was shared by the then cabinet secretary Mark Sedwill. He accused Hancock of repeatedly lying in meetings (a charge the health secretary has denied) and mishandling pandemic planning, personal protective equipment and mass testing; and wrongly promising Johnson hospital patients would be tested for Covid before being discharged to care homes [ominously for Hancock, Johnson did not rush to his defence. Cummings’ suspicion that he was kept in post so he could become the fall guy might come to pass]

As well Cummings claimed lockdowns could have been avoided altogether “if we’d had the right preparations and competent people in charge”. He said if he himself had had the power, there would have been a “serious border policy”, masks would have been compulsory and Health Secretary Matt Hancock would have been fired (Mr Cummings also claimed Boris Johnson had come close to removing Mr Hancock in April – which Downing Street has declined to deny)

[Dominic Cummings has now publicly blown up three Tory leaders under whom he has worked – Iain DuncanSmith, David Cameron and now Boris Johnson]

Regarding delay in lockdown Mr Cummings said the Government’s delay in locking down in March 2020 and lack of action plan was similar to 1996 disaster film Independence Day, in which the US is devastated by a surprise alien invasion, and he claimed that one top official told him ‘we are absolutely f******’. Cummings told the committee on the Wednesday morning he felt “mounting panic” about the response in the early days of the pandemic and was pushing on March 11 and 12 for the Government to announce that individuals should stay at home if they had symptoms and households should quarantine. But he said there was “push back from within the system” and “me and others were realising at this point the system is basically delaying announcing all of these things because there’s not a proper plan in place”. He claimed that the Cabinet Office is ‘terrifyingly s***’ and that there were ‘no plans’. He also alleged that coronavirus meetings on March 12, 2020, got ‘derailed’ by then-President Trump’s request for the UK to join a bombing campaign in the Middle East, and Boris Johnson’s girlfriend, Carrie Symonds, going ‘completely crackers’ over a media story about the couple’s dog. Mr Cummings also told MPs that on March 13 the “second most powerful official in the country” at the time, Helen MacNamara, who was Deputy Cabinet Secretary, said ‘there is no plan – we’re in huge trouble’. Mr Cummings said she told him: “I think we are absolutely f*****, I think this country is headed for disaster, I think we’re going to kill thousands of people.” Dominic Cummings said he pressed Boris Johnson in September to impose a second lockdown but claims the Prime Minister ignored advice. “He wasn’t taking any advice, he was just making his own decisions, he was going to ignore the advice – “formal Cabinet wasn’t involved or asked – no Cabinet meeting to discuss it, or if it was, it was a purely Potemkin exercise.” i.e. fraudulent or counterfeit (Dominic Cummings said Boris Johnson favoured the economic arguments for not imposing a second lockdown and for the Prime Minister the economic arguments were outweighing everything. Johnson was not persuaded there needed to be a circuit-breaker lockdown in September and decided to just “hit and hope” – Cummings told the committee that during meetings in September Sage scientists and England’s chief medical officer Chris Whitty and chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance had said that there needed to be a two-week lockdown but despite modelling showing the NHS was going to get “smashed again” Mr Johnson decided not to lock down)

Furthermore, Dominic Cummings said Government talk of putting a shield around care homes was “complete nonsense”. He said: “We were told categorically in March that people would be tested before they went back to homes, we only subsequently found out that that hadn’t happened. “Now while the Government rhetoric was we have put a shield around care homes and blah blah blah, it was complete nonsense. “Quite the opposite of putting a shield around them, we sent people with Covid back to the care homes.” However Downing Street has defended its handling of care homes during the coronavirus crisis after the scathing criticism and the Prime Minister’s official spokesman said: “With regard to care homes, we’ve always been guided by the latest advice at that time and we’ve taken a number of steps to protect care home residents and those being discharged from hospitals into care homes.”

The former chief aide to the PM told the committee also said the “Government kind of collapsed” when Boris Johnson became ill with coronavirus. “In lots of ways, the whole core of Government fundamentally fell apart –  Mr Cummings claimed that there was a “fundamental problem” with who in Government was responsible for things” He also accused Matt Hancock of “criminal, disgraceful behaviour” by interfering with the test and trace system to hit his “stupid” 100,000 daily target while Boris Johnson was in hospital. In his opinion, disastrously, the Secretary of State had made, while the Prime Minister was on his near death bed, his pledge to do 100,000 by the end of April,” he said “This was an incredibly stupid thing to do because we already had that goal internally”)

‘PM never wanted a proper border policy’ Dominic Cummings has claimed Boris Johnson never wanted a serious border policy to combat coronavirus as he sought to prioritise the travel industry.

The former chief aide said the advice before April last year “in retrospect was obviously completely wrong”, including that it was “racistto close borders. He claimed that then changed, telling the committee: “After April, though, it’s a completely different story, once we’ve switched to plan B. “Fundamentally, there was no proper border policy because the Prime Minister never wanted a proper border policy. “He claimed repeatedly in meeting after meeting I and others said all we have to do is download the Singapore or Taiwan documents in English and impose them here. “We’re imposing all of these restrictions on people domestically but people can see that everyone is coming in from infected areas, it’s madness, it’s undermining the whole message that we should take it seriously. “At that point he was back to, ‘lockdown was all a terrible mistake, I should’ve been the mayor of Jaws, we should never have done lockdown 1, the travel industry will all be destroyed if we bring in a serious border policy’. “To which, of course, some of us said there’s not going to be a tourism industry in the autumn if we have a second wave, the whole logic was completely wrong.” Mr Cummings later said he thinks the border policy is still inadequate [the utter evidence of that is clearly now clear as it transpires that a maritime loophole allowed some 600 cruise ship workers from India to fly here and avoid compulsory hotel quarantine [it was only closed after worried civil servants raised the alarm, amid fears that the Indian Covid variant will delay lockdown ending – those 600 cruise ship employees travelled from “red-list” India through Heathrow on May 13 and 14 and were NOT put into immediate ten-day isolation at hotels, and instead, the arrivals — mostly Indian nationals with some Filipinos — were classed as seafarers; and as such, they were allowed to go to ports, including Southampton, under a rule designed to stop Naval ratings having to quarantine. However, the loophole was shut on May 19 after concerns were raised with Transport Secretary Grant Shapps by furious civil servants. Cruise crew travelling from red-list countries such as India must NOW quarantine in airport hotels]. So in reality there’s ‘NO PROPER CONTROL OF OUR BORDERS’ and it’s scandalous and shocking that such a loophole ever existed which could mean we are facing lockdown for even longer, eh?.

Johnson’s salary (five times the national average) puts him close to the top 1 per cent of UK earners while also he and his family live rent-free in the No 11 Downing Street flat, though he must pay tax (say £7,000 for electricity, heating and maintenance) on some of the bills, paid for his residence out of his ministerial salary, but he can’t be asked to pay more than about £8,000 a year (capped you see at 10% of his ministerial salary). He also has to pay for his own and Carrie’s food sent up from Downing Street’s kitchen and is presented with a bill. In addition to getting his Downing Street flat free together with the allowance of up to £30,000 a year for refurbishing it, he also has as well unlimited use of the country house Chequers in Buckinghamshire.

Unlike say men on the minimum wage, a subdued ‘asset rich/cash poor‘ Boris Johnson is said to be worried about money and the ability to afford childcare so he is worried he can’t afford a Nanny (required for ONE young boy indeed, when most UK parents look after their multiple own children without one?) [top whack that would set him back say just £2,500 pa when it was revealed in March that he spent around half that on gourmet food from an organic farm shop – perhaps he is using a food bank now he’s skint, eh? His personal trainer charges £165/hour and now Johnson’s net worth is a mere £3million or so, hence he’s really on his uppers, isn’t he?] – in a fresh May storm an unnamed but annoyed Tory donor claims that he was approached to help Johnson out financially and actually fund his new son’s nanny, indeed.

Regarding Boris Johnson’s previous income:

      • while an MP Johnson raked in £275,000 from his Daily Telegraph column and earned plenty from other speaking engagements. In total, he was bringing in more than £350,000 annually.
      • while working as Foreign Secretary in 2017 there were reports Jonson felt his salary of £141,405 a year was not enough to live on.
      • now PM he saw his income drop by more than 50% since when he became PM he brings in £150,000 a year salary, but does not receive the amount in full due to various government bills and taxes attached to the job.

Moreover, it has just come to light that a shock £350,000 tax bill may have triggered Boris Johnson’s cash crisis? That all stems from a year of prolific — and lucrative — public speaking and writing after his resignation from Theresa May’s Cabinet as foreign secretary on July 9, 2018 to the day he marched triumphantly back in as Prime Minister on July 23, 2019. In the space of just over 12 months the future PM pulled in £797,263 — putting him firmly inside the 45 per cent tax bracket for most of his extra-parliamentary earnings, with over half of his sudden windfall came from the after-dinner speaking circuit. Boris was flown to Dublin, New York, New Delhi, and Geneva by banks and corporations.

A single speaking engagement in Delhi alone earned him a fee of £122,900 from media firm India Today, New Delhi, which also paid for flights and accommodation then later he got some £38,250 plus VAT for speaking to Citigroup, Canary Wharf and £28,900 plus travel and accommodation for a speech to KNect365.

He pocketed £94,508 plus expenses from GoldenTree Asset Management, Park Avenue, New York for flying to the United States and a speech to Pendulum Events & Training in Dublin earned him £51,250 andanother £25,297.62 plus transport expenses giving a speech for Banque Pictet & Cie SA, Geneva. £42,580 plus transport provided for him and member of his staff from Swiss Economic Forum AG, for speech.

So ALTOGETHER Mr Johnson trousered £450,475 total plus expenses from just NINE paid speaking engagements between November 8 2018 and May 24 2019

As a former journalist he also cashed in on the demand from people to read his views as speculation mounted that he might succeed Mrs May. He made £295,790 from columns and articles. His weekly piece for the Telegraph took him 10 hours a month to write and netted £22,916 each month — a rate of £2,291 an hour.

All of Mr Johnson’s extra-parliamentary earnings were declared in the register of members’ financial interests. But senior Tories think the sudden bulge in his INCOME left him having to shoulder a big tax demand the following year, and as a Tory grandee said

“Boris is famously chaotic with money — it is not hard to imagine him spending the money and then finding out he owes an absolute fortune in income tax to the Treasury”. “It would certainly explain why within months of arriving at Downing Street he is said to have been complaining that he could not afford to live on a Prime Minister’s salary and started asking donors to pay for the redecoration of his flat.”

Two tax experts told the Standard newspaper that Mr Johnson would have been liable for a total of more than £350,000 — which is MORE than TWICE the £157,372 salary that Mr Johnson receives as PM.

[Kevin Sefton, CEO of untied, the personal tax app, said Mr Johnson’s extra tax and national insurance bill would have been around £270,585 in the year 2018-19, and then another £103,403.11 the following year.

“It’s a hefty bill,” he commented, adding that HM Revenue & Customs would respond to pleas of hardship by deferring payments or accepting instalments.


September 8, 2018 £8,968.27

October 23, 2018 £491.75

December 12, 2018 £525.12 for Hungarian subrights

December 19, 2018 £435.72 for Ukrainian subrights

January 16, 2019 £909.78 for US subrights

March 21, 2019 £739.98.

March 28, 2019 £4,684.62

April 11, 2019 £498.01

May 1, 2019 £33.45 for French royalties

May 16, 2019 £669.27 for Czech royalties

June 12, 2019 £960.63 for Castilian royalties

June 12, 2019, £870.04 for Dutch subrights

July 10, 2019 £706.88 for US royalties

Total: £20,494

Marilyn McKeever, a tax partner at leading law firm BDB Pitmans, said that the bulge in Mr Johnson’s earning power would have made tax planning more difficult. “Self-employed people are asked to pay half their expected tax bill ‘on account’, that is, in advance. But in his case this would have been based on his earnings for the year he was Foreign Secretary, which was far less.

“So on January 31, 2020 he would probably have been asked not only to pay most of the money he owed for the 2018-19 year, but also half as much again ‘on account’ for the following year.”

She said Mr Johnson’s accountant would have advised him to put 45 per cent of his extra income aside for tax, but added: “That assumes his accountant was kept up to date about what Mr Johnson was earning.”

If Mr Johnson was caught out by an unexpected tax bill that dwarfed his official salary, it could explain why he got into so much hot water by trying to offload his expenses while living at No 10. He discussed setting up a trust so that donors would pay for a refurbishment of his free flat above 11 Downing Street.

Recently it was reported that potential donors were approached for gifts of cash to fund a nanny and a personal trainer. No 10 has not properly denied the claim, simply responding: “The Prime Minister paid for all his childcare.”


From July 2018 each month £22,916.66 for writing weekly Telegraph column

(until July 2019 when he quit as foreign secretary and when he became PM)

September 2018 £800, Spectator article

October 2018 £2,000 from Associated Newspapers Ltd

November 2018 £1,000 from News UK for an article

December 2018 £350, Spectator

February 2019 £376.05 from The Washington Post

March 2019 £739.98 royalties for reprinting old articles

July 15, 2019 final payment of £15,524.52 from the Telegraph

Total: £295,791


From January 25, 2018 rental income of “more than £10,000” a year from a property in Somerset.

Asked if Mr Johnson had been taken by surprise by a tax bill, his spokeswoman declined to comment “on personal matters” but said the PM “pays his taxes in full”.

The register of interests reveals that Mr Johnson continues to receive royalties from his 11 books and income from property.

THE UK LOCKDOWN RULES – confusing and in flux? (INCLUDES Mask Wearing changes UK and School Opening plan Reversal (4th,5th, & 8th June)

Some 10 weeks ago the UK government imposed a LOCKDOWN on the evening of Monday 23 March, when restrictions were initially put in place for a period of three weeks, until Monday 13 April, but they were later extended for another 21-day period, and have continued until now albeit with further modifications

Lockdown measures here are starting to be slightly and gradually eased after more than two months of annoying debilitating restrictions, but many, if not most, of us in Britain REMAIN somewhat unclear about exactly what are the CURRENT rules of the lockdown in the UK, not least because of its state of fluidity and moreover due to the understandable but deliberate lack of clarity by the government, so this write-up is intended to explain just where things seem to be just now [and it will be updated as further government announcements are made]

However, the lockdown relaxation nevertheless represents a dangerous moment in the UK’s war against the virus, and one in which people needed to stick with social distancing, must clearly understand the rules, indeed follow them, and moreover appreciate that rules APPLY to EVERYBODY, so should not be bent nor broken as it is NOT one rule for the ELITE and another for the REST as some seem to think [accordingly the rules DO equally apply to Dominic Cummings (who despite national fury got away scot-free with breaking travel restrictions by driving some 250 miles to Durham on March 31st, repeating it, plus driving to a beauty spot, and not self-isolating when required to do so), and very surprisingly and even more embarrassingly the Prime Minister’s younger sister no less, LBC talk station radio host Rachel Johnson, flaunted rules as well, making no secret of the fact that although she is supposedly isolating some 200 miles away in her Exmoor beauty spot’s 500-acre family farm in West Somerset with husband and daughter, she is actually splitting her time between there and when she works in Leicester Square, being at her West London Notting Hill second home residence, where her two sons live, when she enjoys overnight stays, plays tennis with non-family, dog walks with friends, and moreover she meets-up socially with her high social status pals (whereas the rules had strictly prohibited visiting second homes, banned movement between households, and indeed constrained meeting others from a different household) – but apparently as one of the powerful people of wealth & privilege, who is associated with political power, as well as being an insignificant broadcaster, she is afforded keyworker status, which entitles her to travel and sometimes results in staying over (does that sound to you like her being a lockdown ‘equal’, eh? Or perhaps the case of Rosie Duffield MP, who in a humiliation for Labour, resigned her frontbench role as whip after it was revealed she also broke lockdown restrictions when she met her already married partner for a long walk in April (before lockdown restrictions were eased that allowed members of different households to meet-up)? Or EU lover and hypocrite Ian Blackford, the SNP’s leader at Westminster who took his place at PMQs and then despite having accommodation in London (provided by thousands of pounds in taxpayer-funded accommodation expenses), the very next day escaped from a virus prevalence (his words) hit London on March 26 (three days AFTER the UK was officially shut down to fight coronavirus) to travelled on a 600-mile journey from Westminster to return to his multi-acre estate on the Scottish island of Skye, where ‘he says’ he self-isolated as a precaution (although he is not thought to have had COVID-19 symptoms)? Yet, despite his own questionable travel actions he has since been one of the most critical foes of the Prime Minister’s chief adviser Dominic Cummings, and has called repeatedly for the aide to resign or be fired over his much shorter Durham journey during the lockdown, which unsurprisingly has resulted in Blackford himself being the focus of social media fury.

Moreover an expert from the SCIENTIFIC Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) has revealed that a lack of clear communication could be the thing to completely throw off social-distancing measures and also warned of PERCEPTIONS OF UNFAIRNESS as different groups of people have delivered different messages so that was the one thing that could completely DESTROY social-distancing measures. What is needed is clarity, consistency and explanation, and also not giving false explanations.

There’s probably about 10% of people who are getting frustrated, bored, and want to get on with things, and the 1st June relaxation on household groups will perhaps unavoidably give the green light to those people – then the concern is that once some people begin doing things, other people look at them and think well they’re doing it and we’ll do it too.

Well, regarding the rules themselves, for a start, they give the the advice for those aged 70 and over (who can be absolutely fit and healthy and it’s not the case that everybody over 70 has a chronic health condition or an underlying disease) continues to be that they should take particular care to MINIMISE contact with others outside their HOUSEHOLD [if they do go out more frequently, they should be careful to maintain distance from others. They and EVERYONE ELSE should continue to comply with any general social distancing restrictions).

Anyone amongst the 2.2 MILLION most medically vulnerable individuals with very specific medical conditions (including those 70 and over), who have been advised to shield by the NHS or their GP [that group includes those being treated for cancer, those with severe respiratory conditions such as cystic fibrosis, or asthma, and organ transplant recipients], so are ones have been forced to continue to stay indoors and avoid seeing anyone they don’t live with for the past 10 weeks under lockdown (which had been expected to last until the end of June), have actually now have had those restrictions ‘eased’ early so they CAN from the 1st June go outside with family, or exercise with a friend, but they should be careful to follow social distancing rules and should do everything they can to stay at home (hence they are advised to leave the house only once per day), because those in the ‘shielded group’ category remain AT RISK and are likely to be in the greatest danger of serious complications from coronavirus. Also, those of them who live alone (many of whom have had no face-to-face contact with others since March), can now meet OUTSIDE with one person from ANOTHER household providing they adhere to the two-metre social distancing rule

MOST IMPORTANTLY If you are showing coronavirus SYMPTOMS, or if YOU or any of your HOUSEHOLD are self-isolating, you should most definitely STAY AT HOME

The GENERAL advice to EVERYBODY is that you should stay at home as much as possible.

The reasons you may leave home include:

    • for work, where you cannot work from home
    • going to shops that are permitted to be open – to get things like food and medicine
    • to exercise or spend time outdoors
    • any medical need, including to donate blood, avoid injury or illness, escape risk of harm, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person

[Moreover, while taxis are still operating during the current lockdown, they may ONLY be taken for the above “essential” purposes]

NOTE though that these reasons for leaving home are deemed exceptions and even when doing these activities, you should be MINIMISING time spent away from the home and ensure that you are two metres apart from anyone outside of your household

As a result of the 23rd March initial lockdown rules, the government passed Statute Law [Database Portable Document File (PDF)] legislation to give it the authority to impose restrictions on people’s movements and activities. These regulations said

  1. people would not be able to leave their home without a reasonable excuse
  2. gatherings of more than TWO PEOPLE were NOT allowed, unless they were from the same household (this included family members and partners who did not live together)
  3. people should NOT visit friends in their homes or allow people to come and visit them

On May 10, it was further announced that other NEW lockdown rules would start to be introduced, which revealed several different STAGES and STEPS to a new UK’s coronavirus plan. These were detailed in a 60-page plan published by the government.

Overall, there are three PHASES to the UK’s Covid-19 response. These are:

  1. Phase One: which includes attempting to contain and delay the response of the virus
  2. Phase Two: introducing “smarter controls” to the lockdown response
  3. Phase Three: this final one includes creating reliable treatments and a vaccine for the virus

In addition to the three coronavirus phases, it was said that there are multiple steps to easing the lockdown and these are detailed below. However, from the 13th of May there would be changes to the lockdown rules as described herein.

The CURRENT lockdown rules [including those from 10th May as further modified on 28th May relating to ENGLAND are]

  • It HAD BEEN recommended but was ‘non-mandatory’ that people wear FACE COVERINGS, (including MASKS and homemade masks), when they are in enclosed public spaces, such as on public transport, and children would NOT be compelled to wear face coverings at school.

However that all changed on 4th June, when SOME basic common sense finally prevailed within the government, and it was announced that wearing face coverings WILL as a condition of travel be COMPULSORY on public transport buses, trams, trains, coaches, aircraft and ferries in England from 15th June (because passenger numbers are expected to increase when lockdown measures were eased further. This rule change coincides with the planned reopening of non-essential retail and return of some secondary school pupils in England) and passengers failing their duty by not wearing one could “ultimately” lead to a penalty fines (in a similar way to people who travel without a ticket), but very young children, disabled people and those with breathing difficulties would be EXEMPT.

It was further announced on 5th June (moreover without warning those authorities impacted) that all Hospital staff, Patients and Visitors in England MUST wear face coverings from 15 June [Hospital staff will be REQUIRED to wear type one or type two SURGICAL masks at ALL times, while patients and visitors WILL be required to wear face coverings]

This latest move on face masks is just a further example of the government being too SLOW to ACT or COMMUNICATE and moreover one now has to question nevertheless just why the government is waiting until mid-June to bring in the new measures, when the risk of the virus would be much less if it was brought in STRAIGHT AWAY and moreover just WHY compulsory face coverings shouldn’t equally apply in all other areas of public life, where social distancing is NOT possible? [Indeed on 5th June, the World Health Organization (WHO), which previously had stressed there was no evidence that wearing a mask (whether medical or other types) by HEALTHY people in the wider community could prevent them from being infected with respiratory viruses, has now updated its guidance on wearing masks in public to help limit the spread of coronavirus, and has advised that people SHOULD wear masks in SHOPS, public transport and in all AREAS where social distancing is not possible – furthermore people aged 60 and over, or those with underlying health issues, SHOULD wear MEDICAL masks in situations where social distancing was not possible (the WHO added that while masks alone will not protect you from Covid-19, they neither are a replacement for hand hygiene and social distancing)]

[Face coverings are a sensible and potentially useful extra tool that can help us protect each other and ‘reduce the spread’ of the disease particularly if you are suffering from coronavirus, but not yet showing symptoms so don’t know you’re infected]

  • people who aren’t able to work from HOME should be looking to RETURN TO WORK [for the foreseeable future, workers should continue to work from home rather than their normal physical workplace, wherever possible]. People who CANNOT work from home SHOULD travel to work if their workplaces are OPEN [while workplaces should be made safe for staff, with more cleaning, staggered working shifts and, for office workers, no hot-desking). This provision includes those working in food production, construction, manufacturing, logistics, distribution and scientific research]
  • It has been recommended that people who now have to travel to work should prevent overcrowding and AVOID public transport, so should consider all other forms of transport BEFORE using public transport, and therefore should walk, cycle or drive instead, but If they can’t walk, cycle or drive to their destination, they are advised to:
    • Travel at off-peak times
    • Take a less busy route and reduce the number of changes
    • Wait for other passengers to get off before boarding
    • Keep 2m away from people “where possible” [there may be situations where people can’t keep 2m away from each other, such as at busy times or getting on or off public transport. In these cases, the advice is to avoid physical contact and face away from others]
    • Wash their hands for at least 20 seconds after completing their journey
  • People who work in PAID CHILDCARE (such as nannies and childminders), CAN return to work, but only if they’re caring for youngsters who come from the same household or if they are able to follow SOCIAL DISTANCING RULES [during lockdown, registered childminders have either been closed or providing care for vulnerable children or children of key workers]. Also, the government has said it would like pre-school NURSERIES in England to start reopening from 1 June
  • Schools opening and universities return – the government’s ambition was for all primary school children in England to return to school before the summer for a month if feasible. In England, pupils in nurseries, early years nursery, Reception, and Years 1 and 6 at primary schools are able to return from 1 June, but class sizes are expected to be no more than 15 pupils, with staggered breaks and frequent hand washing.

However, on 8th June it was announced that the plans to fully reopen Primary Schools before end of term were to be DROPPED, so the vast majority, probably about eight million children who’d expected to go back into school before the summer, very likely won’t return to the classroom until September. This has been branded a huge disappointment by some, as the reversal decision meant many children would remain “isolated”, with many living in “fragile” family environments for months to come, and that again, there will be a huge variation in their learning over that period. Although Ministers had wanted pupils to spend four weeks in school before the summer break, they had faced a backlash from some in the education sector who said it would be impossible to enforce social distancing to help prevent the spread of coronavirus. This change in plan was not a surprise to some who believed that the ‘ambition’ to bring back all primary year groups for a month before the end of the summer term was a case of the government OVER-PROMISING SOMETHING THAT WASN’T DELIVERABLE as it isn’t possible to do that while maintaining small class sizes and social bubbles

It is reported that Boris Johnson will speak with his Cabinet on morning of Tuesday 9th June before education secretary Gavin Williamson delivers a statement to parliament on the wider reopening of schools, while the Department of Education has said it remained the “ambition” for all primary school children to return before the summer holidays, but it did not deny reports that this DESIRE MAY NOT BE FULFILLED.

Also, the government in Wales had ruled out schools reopening on 1 June, while Scotland’s First Minister has said that children will return to school on 11 August (some pupils in Northern Ireland will return to school in August). From 15 June, the UK government had said some SECONDARY schools and further education COLLEGES would reopen and be able to have face-to-face contact with Year 10 and 12 pupils who have key exams next year, in addition to their “continued remote, home learning”. Meanwhile, there is uncertainty over whether students will be able to go to UNIVERSITY in person in September or whether they will be taught partially or completely online [the university watchdog says new students must be told with “absolute clarity” how they will be taught before accepting a place]

  • Entering someone else’s home – if you’re a cleaner or plumber, so need to enter someone else’s home for your job, you ARE allowed to return to work, although no work should be carried out in the home of someone shielding or isolating because of Covid-19 symptoms, unless it’s a household emergency, while in homes where someone is clinically vulnerable (for example, where a person is aged over 70) face-to-face contact should be AVOIDED, and strict HYGIENE rules followed
  • Moving home – house moves and viewings CAN resume again and potential buyers and renters WILL be able to visit show homes and view houses on the market to let or buy. Anyone who has already bought a new home can visit it to prepare for moving in
  • people can now take “unlimited” amounts of exercise
  • some sports can now be played – all restrictions on exercise and non-contact sports have been lifted
  • people without limit WILL be allowed
    • to sunbathe
    • sit in local parks [you can meet ONE OTHER PERSON from outside your household if you are OUTDOORS. Public gatherings of more than 2 people from different households are prohibited in law. There are no limits on gatherings in the park with members of YOUR household
    • drive further to exercise [you can travel to outdoor open space irrespective of distance, but you shouldn’t travel with someone from outside your household unless you can practise social distancing – for example by cycling. However, you should NOT travel to Wales, Scotland or Northern Ireland, where the rules are different
    • go to a garden centre
    • play sports OUTSIDE with members of a household [use outdoor sports courts or facilities, such as a tennis or basketball court, or golf course – with members of your HOUSEHOLD, or ONE OTHER PERSON while staying 2 metres apart]
    • from Monday 1st June, you ARE able to meet or exercise in groups of up to SIX PEOPLE from DIFFERENT households OUTSIDE – either in PARKS or now also in PRIVATE GARDENS and can use the toilet at the home – as long as you adhere to social distancing which is to remain 2m (6ft) apart [This rules relaxation ONLY applied from the specified date so it would have been ILLEGAL to have applied it beforehand, like say on Sunday 31st May – hence it was a totally mistimed advanced government announcement which could only have caused public confusion, it must be said?

Sports courts can re-open, but you should only partake in such activities ALONE, or with members of YOUR HOUSEHOLD, or with ONE OTHER PERSON from outside your household, while practising social distancing. You should take particular care if you need to use any indoor facilities next to these outdoor courts, such as toilets.

You should NOT use any of these facilities if you are showing coronavirus symptoms, or if you or any of your household are self-isolating

As with before, you CANNOT:

  • visit or stay overnight with friends and family in their homes [however the government had asked the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) to advise on the concept of “bubbles”, which would mean allowing people to expand their household group to include ONE OTHER HOUSEHOLD. HOWEVER, that has in fact resulted in a much different rules relaxation that as from Monday 1st June, you are ALLOWED home meetings in groups (with conditions), of up to SIX PEOPLE from DIFFERENT households, as well as you continuing with permission to spend your time OUTDOORS with up to ONE PERSON from a different household
  • exercise in an indoor sports court, gym or leisure centre, or go swimming in a public pool
  • use an outdoor gym or playground
  • visit a private or ticketed attraction (although 29 National Trust parks began opening on 29th May in a phased resumption
  • gather in a group of more than two (excluding members of your own household), except for a few specific exceptions set out in law (for work, funerals, house moves, supporting the vulnerable, in emergencies and to fulfil legal obligations)
  • leave your home – the place you live – to stay at another home including visiting second homes, for a holiday or other purpose is NOT ALLOWED, although if a student is moving permanently to live back at their family home, this is permitted
  • share a private vehicle with someone from another household
  • have someone attend a funeral who is not from the deceased family’s household, or not close family or friends
  • some non-essential retail stores, bars, and restaurants will remain CLOSED until restrictions are lifted sometime later in June

The May 10th change to working rules did NOT APPLY to

  1. people who work in HOSPITALITY – including pubs, restaurants, cinemas and more
  2. those who work for NON-ESSENTIAL RETAILERS
  • One change to the rules now ALLOWS people to meet others OUTSIDE of their own home. However, this is still very limited. People can meet OUTSIDE with ONE person not from their household as long as they follow social distancing rules and stay two metres apart.
  1. All weddings have been cancelled
  2. Prisons have been put on lockdown with external visits cancelled
  3. Funerals ARE still allowed to take place but they should be limited to a person’s IMMEDIATE FAMILY (this includes spouses and partners, parents or carers, plus siblings and children). Where a grandparent has died, grandchildren can attend and if a person does not have any relatives, a close friend may attend. In all instances, funerals should follow the two metre social distancing guidelines.

in the future, there may be different levels of lockdown around England. This could see some areas with lower R numbers being allowed greater freedoms than those where the virus is more prevalent.

Why UK lockdown rules are different across the UK?

Many of the issues that face the UK can also be decided upon by the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This is done through their own legislation and powers. During May, as the new lockdown rules started to be implemented, differences emerged between the countries, and moreover the rules in those regions are being set or relaxed by their executives on different dates. In most cases, England has moved faster than the other UK nations.


  • travel for exercise
  • issued dates for schools reopening
  • allowed limited socialising in open spaces

BUT since then from Friday 28th May in Scotland, there is no longer any limit to the amount of time you can spend outside doing exercise, or in open-air recreation like sunbathing in parks and open areas, PLUS outdoor activities (including golf, tennis, bowls and fishing,) can RESUME where physical distancing can be maintained, AND also members of TWO different households will be allowed to meet up OUTDOORS if they maintain social distancing (groups cannot be bigger than eight, and people are “strongly recommended” not to meet more than one OTHER household per day), whilst they should not use indoor bathrooms if visiting someone in their garden and whereas there’s no actual limit on travel, people are advised to stay local. In Wales, people from two different households will be able to meet each other outdoors from 1st June, but must maintain social distancing and strict hand hygiene, and shouldn’t generally travel more than 5 miles from home

  • encouraged companies to reopen
  • Scotland has said people should wear face coverings in crowded areas, in shops and on public transport (but it isn’t YET compulsory), while Wales has not yet recommended face coverings for the general public
  • In NORTHERN IRELAND people ARE being allowed to travel for exercise, socialise in outdoor spaces and people have been told to cover their faces in crowded public spaces. Groups of four to six people who are NOT in the same household CAN meet OUTDOORS, although outdoor WEDDINGS with 10 people present may be allowed from 8 June

Do we know when will the UK lockdown end?

On April 30, it was confirmed the UK had passed the PEAK of its first coronavirus outbreak. This announcement gave the first sign that the government was seriously thinking about how to end some of the lockdown measures that had been put in place.

Throughout the crisis, officials have been reluctant to put any firm dates on when measures would change. And that has not changed. “This is not the time simply to end the lockdown this week,” Johnson said on May 10. Instead the UK would start to take the “first careful steps to modify our measures”.

Johnson said there was a balance that needed to be struck between reopening the economy and ensuring the highest levels of public health protection. The government would be following science, data, and advice from public health officials as it decided which lockdown measures to ease.

The end of the lockdown is being guided by five key tests that the government is following. These tests have been designed to ensure that once people are allowed to freely move around again, there is less likelihood of a second wave of the virus appearing. The tests are largely measures of preparedness for the near-term future.

The five key tests are:

  1. the NHS having capacity to provide critical care across the UK
  2. a sustained and consistent fall in daily coronavirus deaths
  3. a decreased rate of infections
  4. enough testing and personal protective equipment are held for future demand;
  5. a confidence that adjusting the lockdown measures will not risk a second peak of infections.

One key factor to monitoring when certain lockdown restrictions will end is the R number. This is a measure of the rate of transmission of the coronavirus

Worryingly, the R value in England has risen in all regions so is between 0.7 and 1, and the latest data suggests the North-West in particular (where it is close to one – above one means the infection is spreading exponentially) and to a lesser extent South-West are both areas of concern, as it has been confirmed that the R was higher in those regions than the rest of the country and although National easing of lockdown measures would go ahead, it would be with a focus on localised lockdowns to address flare-ups. That all means that the need for such localised lockdowns loom as increasingly there will be a requirement to tackle specific areas where flare-ups are spotted, which is going to be divisive, don’t you think?

Coronavirus lockdown: scientists advising the Government have suggested employing a TRAFFIC light code system to grade the risk of activities while “very gradually” lifting lockdown

Coronavirus lockdown: scientists advising the Government have suggested employing a TRAFFIC light code system to grade the risk of activities while “very gradually” lifting lockdown

The 10th May address outlined that the lockdown would also be monitored though a new system of alerts. The system works on a scale of one to five – ranging from a “low” to “critical” threat level.

Achieving a one on this scale indicates that coronavirus is not present in the UK any more. This is something that is unlikely to be reached for a long time, if it is ever achieved, and will most likely rely on a vaccine being created. At the top end of the scale, number five, there is a significant risk the NHS is not able to handle the number of coronavirus cases where patients need to be hospitalised.

The level is being determined by a Joint Biosecurity Centre, and would be measured based on the R number and the number of new cases in the country. “That Covid Alert Level will tell us how tough we have to be in our social distancing measures – the lower the level the fewer the measures,” Johnson said. “The higher the level, the tougher and stricter we will have to be.” During the lockdown the UK was at level four.

Alongside the alerts are THREE STEPS the government is introducing to ease the lockdown.

  1. STEP ONE [‘CONFIRMED’ commenced May 13] –some restrictions on who can go to work were being eased, as well as the ability to meet one person from another household and the allowance of unlimited exercise.
  2. STEP TWOUNCONFIRMED’ which may happen from June 1.
  • This step would allow a PHASED RETURN FOR SCHOOLS, with pupils from reception, year one and year six being allowed back into classrooms. “The government’s ambition is for all primary school children to return to school before the summer for a month if feasible, though this will be kept under review. The government has issued more guidance on how it believes schools can safely return. It states that the majority of staff in schools will NOT need PPE and that primary school pupils CANNOT be expected to stay two metres apart. Schools should make sure hand cleaning is done regularly, buildings are cleaned often and where possible physical contact and mixing of groups should be avoided.

The guidance also says that class sizes should be REDUCED (instead of 30 pupils in classes, groups should not number more than 15). Teachers will be allocated to the same group of pupils. Where possible, desks should be spread out further than they usually are. Corridor dividers to keep people apart, one-way systems, and limits on the number of people that can enter toilets at once are also being recommended for schools. Finally, the government says schools should look at introducing staggered pickup times for pupils to stop the amount of mixing that happens between adults from different households.

    • Also in step two could be the reopening of “non-essential retail“. The government has not outlined the types of businesses that it considered to be non-essential retailers in any detail but it is NOT thought to include pubs and similar firms
    • There’s no change at this time, but it is an intention to enable small wedding ceremonies from 1 June.


  1. STEP THREE,UNCONFIRMED’ which may happen no earlier than July 4,
  • The roadmap sets out that some businesses (like pubs, cinemas) will NOT open until Step 3 is reached – but that would see the reopening of some of the HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY and other public places.
  • when this point is reached, many of the remaining lockdown measures would be eased. (this may include the reopening of hairdressers, beauty salons, pubs, hotels, and leisure facilities such as cinemas)

When will shops and pubs reopen?

The vast majority of retailers had to close their doors on March 23. The government said bars, clubs, restaurants and cafes should be closed, unless they are open for takeaways or deliveries. In addition, hair and beauty shops (including nail salons and tattoo parlours), massage parlours, auction houses, car showrooms, hotels, campsites, caravan parks, libraries, community centres, places of worship, cinemas and similar venues, museums, casinos and betting shops, spas, gyms, arcades and skating rinks should all be closed.

The government has provided extra guidance and exemptions for many of these businesses.

Supermarkets and other food shops have been allowed to stay open, as can many services that people rely on for basic needs. Banks, newsagents and corner shops, post offices, dry cleaners, home and hardware shops, petrol stations, laundrettes, pet shops, and car rentals are allowed to continue operating. As can pharmacies and market stalls that provide groceries. Shops and organisations that have stayed open have introduced extra safety measures to comply with social distancing rules. These include queue control outside shops and limits on number of people allowed in stores.

Online shopping hasn’t changed. Food deliveries, takeaways and other online shopping, including Amazon deliveries, are still happening. The government has said online shopping is “encouraged” and delivery services and the postal service are running as normal. When the government ordered restaurants to close on March 20, it said they could stay open for takeaways and deliveries. People aren’t allowed to eat food or drink while waiting for a takeaway and have to keep two metres apart while queuing.

In the May 10 announcement, it was said there could be a “phased” reopening of shops from the start of June. However, this would depend on the UK’s continued coronavirus response and a further reduction in cases. Pubs are likely to be one of the last sectors of the economy to reopen. As with the rest of the country’s retailers, the government has not set a definite date for pubs to reopen, but its roadmap to ending the lockdown says the earliest this could happen would be at the start of July [In fact with the latest update, while now Pubs, Restaurants, Hairdressers, Hotels, Cinemas and places of Worship will open from 4 July at the earliest (but only as long as they can meet social distancing measures), other indoor public spaces such as beauty salons, where social distancing may be difficult, could reopen ”significantly later”, depending on when the rate of infection goes down

GARDEN CENTRES have already reopened in England, Wales and Northern Ireland, and are now due to reopen in Scotland, while DIY chains (some of which stayed open throughout the lockdown) have also REOPENED many of their shops

All NON-ESSENTIAL retailers – from DEPARTMENT stores to small INDEPENDENT shops – can REOPEN in England from 15 June,but only IF they put in place social distancing measures.

OUTDOOR MARKETS and CAR showrooms can reopen from 1 June, but only IF they are “Covid-secure” [however the government has said these dates could change if coronavirus infection rates increase]

Can I see my family?

The lockdown plans outlined by Johnson on May 10 changed very little. People were allowed to meet one person from another household as long as they are OUTSIDE from May 13, but they must keep two metres apart at all times. The lockdown rules say people cannot mix with other households.

It was said that in the future this may change. Sage, the government’s science advisory committee, was asked to examine when it may be possible for people to spend time with one other household. “The government said, the intention of such a change would be to allow those who are isolated some more social contact, and to reduce the most harmful effects of the then social restrictions, while continuing to limit the risk of chains of transmission, although at that time no date had been put on when that could happen. HOWEVER, it has in fact resulted in a much different rules relaxation as outlined above that from Monday 1st June, allowed meetings in groups (with conditions), of up to SIX PEOPLE from DIFFERENT households [it might though have been cleverer to have set the number to eight (as in Scotland) and view 1 family as 2 adults and 2 children, perhaps?]

Who can go to work under lockdown?

Companies have been told that everyone working for them should work from home, “wherever possible”. This includes the vast majority of people who work in offices and many other professions. While restaurants are allowed to stay open serving takeaways and deliveries, many of them (including Nando’s and McDonald’s) have decided to close entirely due to the difficulties of enforcing social distancing. People who work for retailers that are allowed to stay open should speak to their employers about their individual situations.

With the closure of schools, the UK government also issued a list of who it identifies as key workers. It’s a broad list. Included are people working in health and social key, education, government, public services (including the justice system, charities and journalists), people providing food and other necessary goods, transportation services and utilities.

On May 10, Johnson said that people who can work from home should continue to do so. He did not give a date when this might change. However, he said that if people could not work from home – citing examples of people who work in construction – then they should be encouraged to return to work. “When you do go to work, if possible do so by car or even better by walking or bicycle,” the prime minister urged. He recommended that people DO NOT USE public transport where possible.

When offices do reopen things will be different. Johnson has said the government is working on guidance to make workplaces “Covid-secure”. This guidance has yet to be published. Reports say companies will have to limit hot desking and introduce protective screens to workplaces to ensure people don’t come into contact with each other. Staff canteens will stay closed and it is likely that shifts will be staggered for different employees. One team may work in an office space for one week and then switch with another team for the following week.

These measures may be added on top of other returning to work measures. Social distancing will be required in all types of workplaces and existing government guidance says face-to-face meetings should last for 15 minutes at the very most. It is likely some forms of social distancing will operate until a vaccine for coronavirus is found.

What rules apply about flying into and out of the UK?

The Foreign Office currently advises against all but ESSENTIAL journeys, and the government has now said a two-week QUARANTINE period for people arriving in the UK will be introduced as soon as possible, but there will be some exemptions for people arriving from the Republic of Ireland as part of the Common Travel Area.


A two-week quarantine period for anyone arriving in the UK will be enforced from 8 June.

As usual all TOO LATE of course to prove effective, as this is yet another action that the government should have imposed 3 months ago to prevent the current virus crisis here, whereas UK airlines predict the measure’s belated introduction at this stage will have now a devastating impact on their industry as well as the wider economy. Airline and Ports authorities involved have deemed this quarantine measure to be an overzealous policy with no credibility and one which would indeed effectively kill off air travel.

Passengers arriving in the UK by plane, ferry or train – including UK nationals – will HAVE to provide an address where they will remain for 14 days (there is a £100 penalty for anyone found to have not filled in this ”contact locator” form), and surprise visits will be used to check they are following the rules (those in England could be fined up to £1,000 if they fail to self-isolate, while governments in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland can also impose penalties). If international travellers cannot say where they plan to self-isolate for 14 days, they will have to do so in accommodation arranged by the government.

Passengers will be asked to drive in their own car to their destination, where possible.

They must then NOT go to work, school, or public areas, or use public transport or taxis. They should also NOT have any visitors unless they are providing essential support, and should NOT go out to buy food or other essentials where they can rely on others.

The UK’s quarantine rules WON’T apply to everybody though, as there are a number of groups who are exempt, including:

Road haulage and freight workers

Medical officials who are travelling to help fight coronavirus

Anyone arriving from the Republic of Ireland, the Channel Islands, or the Isle of Man

Seasonal agricultural workers if they self-isolate on the property where they are working

(Although it had initially been suggested that the rules would also NOT apply to travellers from France, that has been rescinded as the Government has backtracked on French quarantine exemption, so the same quarantine measures WILL also apply to the French)

The possibility of introducing “air bridges” is however being considered by the government. This would be an arrangement where travellers from countries with ‘low coronavirus levels’ could be exempt from quarantine]

  • All passengers are advised by the government to remain 2m (6ft) apart wherever possible. They should also consider wearing gloves and a face covering – which some UK airports [already Manchester, Stansted and East Midlands] and some airlines [Air France, several US airlines] have made compulsory. Air France’s passengers will be temperature-checked before flying
  • Heathrow, one of the world’s busiest airports, is already trialling large-scale temperature checks and some temperature screening trials will also be conducted at Stansted. What airlines will be flying?Ryanair still plans to reintroduce 40% of its flights from 1 July, subject to travel restrictions being lifted and safety measures being brought in at airports.
  • British Airways is reviewing its plans to run 50% of its schedule from July, because of the new quarantine rules
  • EasyJet will restart a small number of flights on 15 June, with all passengers and cabin crew told to wear face masks.


  • Spain, Italy, Greece, Canada, the UAE, Australia, New Zealand


Have fourteen-day quarantine rules applying, and many have introduced screening measures such as temperature checks, and entry restrictions. Spain and some others have banned foreign visitors, and where only UK citizens with permanent resident status can enter.

  • Italy arrivals must carry a form explaining their reason for travel, avoid public transport and report to health authorities
  • France has announced quarantine plans for UK arrivals (basically in retaliation to the UK’s quarantine?)
  • The US only has 13 airports open for international flights
  • Canadian rules insist airlines must carry out health assessments on passengers
  • The United Arab Emirates has strict entry rules for foreign residents
  • Australia a special exemption visa to travel there is need by UK citizens
  • New Zealand the border is closed to almost all arrivals]

[It is going to be many months before greater clarity returns to the UK lockdown and its restrictions and that’s unfortunate since community spirit as well as the economy is currently trashed]



Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) -man-made or NOT? functional Analysis with additional critical Commentary and further Data updates (Tuesday 26th May 2020)






Yep, but Instead, PM Boris Johnson had voiced to the nation some more of his meaningless platitudes about dealing with coronavirus in a confusing television statement SUNDAY evening two weeks ago, which simply raised more questions than answered – as new Labour leader Keir Starmer has pointed-out. The government subsequently released a 60 page explanation of proposals a day later (pity that Johnson didn’t seem to know the details before he spoke, eh?]. Now that comes on top of him changing the clear government message of “Stay at Home” which was well understood and heeded by the public (though not by lockdown rules abusers or cheating senior government players apparently). The NEW nebulous slogan is “STAY ALERT AND CONTROL THE VIRUS”, which will NOT be well understood nor heeded by the public as it won’t even be comprehended by Ministers (alert is commonly used to mean ‘awake’, and ‘control’ means direct something’s behaviour or supervise the running of it, when so far the public have been well informed that the virus can’t be controlled by any country or government, let alone by us as individuals), It is a further example of ministers putting out ‘vague’ and ‘meaningless’ mixed messages that will inevitably result in individuals creating their own interpretations and versions (does the government really expect people to stay awake day and night just to shout at the virus and scare it off, perhaps?

To at last successfully tackle here this ‘out-of-control’ pandemic there has to be a NATIONAL approach and absolute NATIONWIDE control by the government over resources and all the Country’s defences, so what is particularly worrying is that in a disastrous dereliction of duty the UK Prime Minister and his government has seemingly relinquished control over lockdown and virus handling by allowing the devolved parliaments in Scotland, Wales and NI to paddle their own canoes and go their own separate ways, to have completely different rules applying in their different regional areas with alternative routes going forward – is this the start of the break-up of the Union, as has been persistently sought by protagonist in Scotland Nicola Sturgeon, , the Scottish first minister with institutional powers to undermine the authority of a Tory prime minister, eh?

What next, the 9 directly mayors of London, Manchester, Liverpool, South Yorkshire, Northumberland, Tees Valley, West of England, West Midlands, and Cambridgeshire, to also define their own rules, laws and methods of enforcement, eh? All that would spread divisive alarm and despondency throughout the British Iles, surely?

Johnson’s plan, as presented,  lacked clarity and was bereft of detail but involved establishing a traffic light system to signify the level of threat the virus is deemed to present to Britain (akin to that used in relation to a potential terrorist attack). Now, exactly how that is going to help anyone deal with this pandemic in the UK is anyone’s guess, isn’t it?

[Just remember as well that the impending economic doom was SELF-INFLICTED because the UK WASN’T PREPARED, did TOO LITTLE TOO LATE and compounded that with BAD DECISIONS along the way]

What was needed 1st and IMMEDIATELY months ago from the British government was for it to take the necessary action to enact the design, production and widespread introduction of a virus effective, low cost, bulk produced respirator, issued free STRAIGHT AWAY to all the general population, so they could safely resume normal activities, like working and socialising, whence the Country’s economic life could have been resurrected and be returned to normal with businesses being revived to achieve their future economic survival

The 2nd thing still on the agenda is to ramp up the action in the UK to find and trial in BRITAIN drug treatments for the virus, as that would have an ‘immediate’ effect on our successful handling of this crisis, whereas the concentration here so far has been primarily focused on the research for a vaccine [indeed the first human patients (two volunteers) have been injected in a UK vaccine trial involving over 1000 healthy people, that began in Oxford on 23 April, but it will be a while before we know the efficiency result because they can’t then actually expose people to a deadly virus to check the vaccine, can they? – the vaccine was developed in under three months by a team at Oxford University), which though critically important nevertheless has only mid to long term significance for the Country’s ability to overcome the coronavirus epidemic (just note though that there has never been any drug treatment for flue and that has been a respiratory illness that’s been with us for decades, hasn’t it?)]

[Remdesivir thought to be one of the best prospects for potentially treating Covid-19 (the experimental drug is an antiviral made by the US company Gilead Sciences, and was first trialled against Ebola but failed to show benefits in Africa) – but reportedly the first full trial in US of this particular drug (in a “gold standard” trial of 237 patients) showed it perhaps was ineffective, and the initial WHO draft put online in their clinical trials database, states that it does not benefit severe coronavirus patients – since then, the trial results’ analysis, published in the Lancet, was a bit more positive, although it also found no significant clinical benefit from use of the drug. However, while not statistically significant, the time to clinical improvement and duration of invasive mechanical ventilation were shorter in people treated with remdesivir within 10 days after illness onset, compared to standard care.

(One hundred and fifty-eight patients were randomised to Remdesivir and 79 patients were randomised to placebo for 14 days)

The trial had to be stopped early due to lack of patients, which meant the trial was underpowered and the results are inconclusive.

Disappointingly, while there was seen no clear benefit from Remdesivir, there were however suggestions of a possible benefit, particularly in those treated earlier, so ongoing, bigger trials will be needed to confirm or refute the findings

[Remdesivir had not previously been licensed or approved anywhere globally and has not yet been demonstrated to be safe or effective for the treatment of COVID-19. However, as it is believed that the drug’s POTENTIAL benefits outweigh its RISKS, the US has issued emergency use authorization (EUA) of this experimental drug for coronavirus following the US regulator FDA’s opinion that the drug, which appears to help some recover faster, can block the virus, so it should be available for hospitalized Covid-19 patients (it would become a new standard of care for severely ill Covid-19 patients like those in the study. The drug has not been tested on people with milder illness, and currently is given through an IV in a hospital).

Those given the drug were able to leave the hospital in 11 days on average versus 15 days for the comparison group. The drug also might be reducing deaths, although that’s not certain from the partial results revealed so far

Remdesivir, as with all drugs, has its side effects which here includes increased levels of liver enzymes, (which may be a sign of inflammation or damage to cells in the liver) and infusion-related reactions (which may include low blood pressure, nausea, vomiting, sweating and shivering), but there may be other serious side effects that have not been discovered yet, so the drug is NOT risk free and will still need formal approval, but the FDA can convert the drug’s status to full approval if Gilead or other researchers provide additional data of its safety and effectiveness. (The EUA requires hospitals to monitor patients’ liver enzymes through blood tests before the treatment is started and every day that treatment is ongoing)]

Japan’s health ministry has also now approved antiviral drug remdesivir as a treatment for COVID-19

   Just recall everybody, that Britain issued gas masks in 1939 to protect civilians from the effects of dreaded potential gas raids (which never came), and those respirators were issued to the entire population [every man, woman and child had their own respirator (gas mask) and even babies could wear masks]. The government needed to urgently produce close to 38 million masks and the contract was given to a factory in Lancashire, where production started in earnest in 1938. Indeed, public posters reminded people to carry their gas mask at all times, and though the smell of the rubber and disinfectant made some feel sick, people were fined if they were caught without their gas masks.

SEE THE INFORMATION BELOW about innovators’ converting low-cost snorkel masks into ‘homemade’ respirators WHICH DOESN’T YET SEEM TO HAVE BEEN TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF IN THE UK? That is despite the fact that a firm here is making valves that transform a £25 snorkelling mask into a respiratory ventilator for coronavirus patients [Protolabs, in Halesfield, Telford, Shropshire, is 3D printing the Charlotte’ valves parts for Italian firm Isinnova, and being shipped to Italy, and will be made ready for medical use where engineers came up with the novel solution – the mask is widely sold at Decathlon stores and online priced at £24.99.

While the masks and the Charlotte valve have NOT yet been officially certified for medical use but with other masks often not available in Italy, patients are now able to take advantage of a potentially life-saving option, and this is already having a really positive impact on the challenge faced by medical staff and the wider society.

A 3rd and a very pressing matter still on the agenda, is of course removal of elements of the lockdown (extended despite the May 10 changes when there were signs that compliance with the nationwide quarantine was starting to fray), and thereby restore the Country’s more normal life and revive business, but SO FAR the UK government seem to be totally clueless and to date has been surprisingly bereft of IDEAS on how to do that very thing. Ministers still have no CREDIBLE or defined strategy NOR EXIT PLAN, on how to move out of our lockdown – and more so when unexpectedly the government had stubbornly refused to talk about an exit strategy, while around the world, from Germany to California, exit strategies were being published, [and indeed the World Health Organization (WHO) had already issued one for use across the globe], it’s true though that earlier last month ‘five tests’ were set out in strategy documents by the UK , which was said must be met before the lockdown could be eased. (while it would seem that the UK is ‘past the peak’ nevertheless this pandemic is nowhere near over yet). It was said that they WOULD have a plan TWO weekends ago but as expected there weren’t any bright innovations to make it work nor a CONFIRMED timetable and in light of their track record so far with this pandemic, many of us can’t trust their plan to END or adequately MODIFY the UK lockdown in a SAFE way, can we? No, and as there aren’t any alternative safeguards introduced, it seems more likely that the current lockdown restrictions perhaps with minor minimal changes (say like using 1m social distancing) will simply carryon for months despite the economy increasingly going down the toilet


The UK’s published strategy correctly involves:

  • Mass testing, plus temperature checkswe are scrambling to increase UK testing capacity which is vital in knowing who has the virus, but a significant proportion of infections are caused by people who are pre-symptomatic, which is estimated to be in the region of ‘45 per cent in lockdown’, falling to around ‘25 per cent in normal times’, and it is only PCR ‘do you have it’ tests IN CONJUNCTION with temperature checks that will identify this crucial group
  • Rapid reaction or ‘contact and trace’ team
    tests alone are basically ineffective without being ‘accompanied’ by highly localised contact and trace teams to ‘contain’ the virus by making sure that newly discovered cases are quickly ‘quarantined’ and their close ‘contacts traced’. The UK did this at the start of the coronavirus outbreak but due to ‘LACK OF PREPAREDNESS’ soon ran out of CAPACITY, allowing the virus to SPREAD [reportedly the last active tracing in UK was as long ago as 12 March, which is disgusting in light of the fact that the evidence is that tracing and subsequent isolation of those infected is the ONLY way to eliminate contagion, don’t you think?
  • Special testing at all ports
    (a special focus on all ports of entry to prevent ‘potential’ new cases entering the country, as is done In China and much of Asia and as is recommended by the WHO)
  • A ‘self-reporting’ system for people with Covid symptomsthe Country must fundamentally increase capacity to quickly identify suspected cases of Covid-19 in the general population based on the ONSET of signs or symptoms – a new NHS symptom checker will need to be rolled out to help people ‘spot their symptoms’ early and self-refer themselves for testing if they have any. SELF-REPORTING OF SYMPTOMS MUST BE MADE COMPULSORY WITH MAJOR FINES IMPOSED ON THOSE WHO DON’T FULLY COMPLYPersonal protective equipment

it is vital to have a very large stockpile of PPE, and Spain, Germany, Italy and America all now recommend the use of ‘surgical facemasks’ on public transport systems and in other areas where close contacts are likely The masks are designed NOT for the protection of the individual SELF, but for the protection of OTHERS – it’s LIKELY that some form of FACIAL COVER is going to become the norm in ALL societies fighting coronavirus


    • Step one: Protect the NHS

Protect the NHS’s ability to cope – be able to provide sufficient critical care and specialist treatment right across the UK

(The seven new ‘Nightingale’ Hospitals would increase NHS capacity by more than 10,000 beds (currently five are operational, but the two ‘Pop up’ hospitals in Washington and Exeter are yet to open, though however, the latest data suggests that regions outside the M25 are behind the curve of infectionsA sustained and consistent fall in the daily death rates from coronavirus (showing that we have moved beyond the peak). Death figures are expected to “reach a plateau” before they fall


    • Step two: Consistent fall in death rates

A sustained and consistent fall in the daily death rates from coronavirus (showing that we have moved beyond the peak). Death figures are expected to “reach a plateau” before they fall


    • Step three: Lower infection rates across the board

Having data that showed the rate of infection was “decreasing to manageable levels across the board (it is currently assessed that the rate of infection, or the R value, is “almost certainly below 1” in the community, which means that on average each infected person is, in turn, infecting less than one other person – signifying that the virus and the epidemic is likely now shrinking

    • Step four: Testing and PPE

Ensuring that operationally testing capacity and personal protective equipment (PPE) availability were in hand, with supply able to meet further demand (which includes the requirement that everyone in the social care system who needs a test can get one immediately)

    • Step five: Prevent a second peak

Ensuring any adjustments to the current measures would not risk a second peak of infections that overwhelm the NHS. (the concern is that a second wave in the autumn would cause even greater damage to the UK economy)]

A couple of weeks ago, it would appear that the first four of these have either been met or were close to being met. The FIFTH – which ministers had always said is the most important – was described on official Government documents a week last Monday as a confidence that “any adjustments to the current measures will not risk a second peak of infections“.

However, on the Tuesday, the wording was changed to say the aim was to avoid a second peak that overwhelms the NHS – relaxing goal, making it easier for ministers to have claimed that the test had been met.

NOW, notwithstanding the government’s previous lassitude on disclosing the way forward nor indeed treating people like adults, some of us who did and DO have ideas, believe that removing the lockdown should ONLY be achieved by introducing at the same time ALTERNATIVE ‘safeguards’ (as is suggested herein) that will prevent a renewed virus surge, but we can’t see that the government is doing just that.

You see, we have already seen evidence locally that responsible small local ‘essential’ businesses that are currently allowed to open (e.g. small grocery shop, pharmacy, Post Office newsagents, bakers, butchers), are in fact successfully controlling customer access and numbers, are enforcing 2m social distancing, are employing protective screens for cahiers, are encouraging contactless payments, and are providing sanitiser anti-viral sprays. Using that, building-on it, and extending that kind of controlled approach, plus enhancing it by enforcing (NOT simply recommending) use of surgical face masks in PUBLIC places by EVERYBODY (NOT just workers) to help stop the spread from virus carriers or the asymptomatic, and even more importantly also by requiring the taking of customer temperatures using fever screening thermal cameras, combined with use of hand spray sanitiser, BEFORE ALLOWING CUSTOMERS IN, which should allow MOST if not all restaurants, pubs, gyms, and cafes to REOPEN immediately (perhaps with certain size dependent bespoke restrictions/conditions) – as well as OFFICES, other WORKPLACES and most significantly fully COMMIT to restart children’s education and reopen SCHOOLS [starting perhaps with the youngest pupils (if that is medically considered the safest) and with strict class size enforcement to avoid introducing social distancing issues]. 

A study has concluded that preliminary evidence from data gathered by contact tracing and population screening studies around the world, shows that CHILDREN and young people are only half as likely as adults to become infected with coronavirus (under-20s appear 56% less likely to contract Covid-19), so that supports the idea that children are unlikely to play a major role in spreading the disease – they have the lowest prevalence of infections and the risk of death or severe infection from Covid-19 is exceptionally low in children, and the balance of evidence is clearly that children are the safest group to be out in the community, while nevertheless an EFFECTIVE test and trace mechanism being in place is very important to mitigate any uncertainty about transmission from children. However, a recently published draft consultation by a group of senior scientists warned that 1 June was too soon for schools to reopen safely and that more time was needed to set up such an effective track and trace system to contain future outbreaks, while the Independent Sage committee, chaired by the former government chief scientist Sir David King, found the RISK of children picking up the virus could be HALVED if they returned to school just two weeks later than ministers were proposing, and delaying until September would reduce the risk still further.

a Marlowe professional sophisticated system

(Thermal Imaging Cameras can assist with Fever Screening by detecting elevated body temperatures in large groups of people, in under 1 second, with accuracy up to ±0.3°C. Temperature checks are not foolproof, but when used at the doors to shops, offices, and other enclosed spaces, they can weed out cases and help stop potential super-spreading events). The technology was developed by a number of manufacturers in response to 2003 SARS virus outbreak and indeed there are low cost ones quite affordable by small businesses

Thermographic Handheld Camera

Fast and non-contact temperature measurement can obtained with a Thermographic Bullet/Turret Camera or a Thermographic Handheld Camera or even a Temperature Screening & Access Control unit (combining temperature screening technology and contactless access control) which can be used to monitor a business’ entrances (if an elevated skin-surface temperature is recognised, entry will be denied, prompting the individual to seek further confirmation using clinical measurement devices before entering).

However, the ONLY clear and safe way out of any serious lockdown and removal of restrictions (like say travelling about or enforcing strict social-distancing measures), is as clearly demonstrated by other counties like say Taiwan, is via the three Ts key message principle, message principle, followed-up by using ISOLATION, isn’t it? YEP and they are:

The NHS tracking App has completed its trial in IOW and is expected to be launched nationally next week, however it would appear that recruitment of Trackers staff has shambolically stalled badly and only about a tenth are now in place – not surprising really when the government contracted the task to repetitive failures Serco, eh?)

95% of UK households do have a smart phone and in 2019, 79% of UK adults (18+) owned a smartphone, 100% of 16-24-year-olds have Internet access via a smartphone, while just 40% of those aged 65+ have the same access. Nevertheless, it may be necessary for the government to free-issue to those in need a cheap phone that can run the app to ensure that EVERYONE in the Country is being properly monitored

There are of course issues surrounding the collection and subsequent use of the data so collected by this Government’s coronavirus tracing app with questions arising as reportedly, the product had failed all the standards which would allow it to be included in the NHS’s own app library, including cyber security, performance and clinical safety (any healthcare app needs to meet certain standards before it is kitemarked in the library). Senior figures have said that it had been hard to assess the App because the government was ”going about it in a kind of a ham-fisted way, and because the app keeps changing, it had not been fully tested, and it was described as a bit wobbly, but all that has been officially DENIED as being factually untrue and it is said that it has been clear that the App will go through the normal assessment and approval process following the Isle of Wight roll-out.

There are also concerns about how users’ privacy will be protected once they log that they have coronavirus symptoms, and become “traceable”, and how this information will be used

However, the smartphone app uses the low-energy Bluetooth signals and not GPS to log when users come into close contact with each other (therefore it does not track people’s locations nor record their identities). When one user reports symptoms in the app that are deemed likely to be Covid-19, an alert SHOULD be sent within 21 days to all those logged as being in contact, advising them to ‘self-isolate’

What the world SHOULD have learnt from Taiwan about fighting coronavirus

In Taiwan, most residents carry on as normal, with offices and schools open. Many restaurants, gyms, and cafes in the capital, Taipei, are still bustling, although most premises will take temperatures and spray hands with sanitiser before allowing customers in

Despite being blocked by Beijing from being part of the WHO, Taiwan put the lessons it learned during the 2003 SARS outbreak to good use, and this time its government and people were both prepared and proactive

As countries around the world fail to grapple with the coronavirus, Taiwan’s example provides valuable lessons on how to curb its spread.

The island is just 81 miles and a short flight away from mainland China, where COVID-19 originated in the city of Wuhan. As the outbreak took hold in January, many Taiwanese business people and their families based in China were returning to celebrate the Lunar New Year, and up to 2,000 Chinese tourists a day visited the island, potentially bringing the virus with them.


And yet, Taiwan still has had only 441 cases of COVID-19 and 7 deaths as of – far fewer than China’s 82,992 cases and 4,634 deaths, a stark contrast even when taking into account the enormous population difference: Taiwan’s almost 24 million to China’s 1.4 billion. Taiwan’s numbers are also much lower than neighbouring countries such as South Korea, which has had more than 11,225 cases, and Japan, with 16,581 cases. It’s also faring better than countries much farther away from China, such as Italy, with 230,158 cases, and the United States, the worst-case country by far which now has an astonishing 1,706,226 cases as of Tuesday

[Some weeks ago President Donald Trump described coronavirus as “the latest hoax” political ploy by the Democrats, likening the Democrats’ criticism of his administration’s response to the new coronavirus outbreak like impeachment as their new hoax.” and he also downplayed the severity of the outbreak, comparing it to the common flu]

Of the over 150 countries and territories affected, Taiwan has one of the lowest incidence rate per capita — around 19 in every 1,000,000 people — for a place that is located so close to China and with so much travel to and from.

[UK (a ‘developed economy’ country) has less than 3x the population of Taiwan (a ‘developing economy’ country) but has

      • about 30thousand percent more coronavirus cases and
      • close to 275thousand percent more coronavirus deaths]

While nations in the Asia Pacific region make up 9 percent of the world’s population, they have only experienced 1 percent of the cases, and less than 1 percent of the deaths. Britain, meanwhile, was shockingly predicted and expected to suffer the highest death rate in Europe, and based on currently published statistics that indeed IS ALREADY the present case, eh?

In contrast, Germany has one of the lowest case fatality rates in the world, with 8,428 deaths for 180,789 detected infections. That’s a case fatality rate of just over 4½ percent, compared to some 14¼ to 15 ½ percent or so in the UK, France and Italy.

.German scientists had also announced that they had succeeded in bringing the R ‘reproduction factor’ (the number of people each person with the virus passes the infection onto) to under 1 for the first time (but Britain is NOW able to claim similar success, however it is somewhat worrying that our UK R rate seems to be a finger in the air estimate rather than an actual recorded data figure or scientific measurement).

Germany has substantially fewer deaths than the UK or France, and that all comes down to a combination of demographics, testing, and chance

Besides, we in the UK might well look in envy at Germany though as it has now begun to lift some of its coronavirus lockdown measures and shops reopened around the country, with car dealerships and furniture stores back in business as well. We will not know for some time if the German authorities have got it right on that one, or have acted too soon in easing the pressure, but it is already crystal clear that Germany has done much better than most of its European neighbours in tackling the virus so far, and their story of success has been based on TWO basic and simple things with some luck thrown-in as well: PREPAREDNESS, combined with a DECENTRALISED public health system that lets doctors make the calls (there is no central authority like the UK’s NHS, so hospitals and clinics are independent, and whereby healthcare is funded by compulsory public insurance).

The luck element relates to the fact that the major outbreak of the virus was introduced to Germany by a very specific path — via skiers returning from winter breaks in the resorts of Austria and Italy. That meant initial infections were confined to the young and fit, who had the best chance of surviving the virus, which gave Germany a vital WINDOW to start its programme of testing and tracking infection chains, before it could spread to the most vulnerable groups (those over 70 or with pre-existing health conditions)


[Germany was better prepared for the coronavirus than anywhere else in Europe for another one key reason: it had more intensive care beds – as seen in Italy, when the intensive care units are full, it is then that the death rate really rises dramatically. At the start of the outbreak Germany had 28,000 ICU beds, far more than any other European country (the UK had just 4,000), and relative to the size of its population, Germany had 29.2 intensive care beds per 100,000 people, compared to 12.5 in Italy, 11.6 in France, and just 6.6 in the UK. Since the crisis began Germany has ramped its total number of ICU beds up even further, to 40,000 — meaning its health system has NEVER been close to overload]. “Test, test, test,” has been the World Health Organisation’s prime ‘by-line’ for successfully tackling the virus, and Germany is one country that has taken that on board really, really seriously, so has carried out over 2m coronavirus tests at a current rate of ½ million a week. [thorough rigorous testing though doesn’t just give more reliable numbers, as it also allows you to stem the spread of the virus by tracing infection chains and isolating people before they can pass it on to others) The other BIG difference, between the UK and Germany is that they got their act together ‘QUICKER’ – doctors and academics worked together with the private sector without waiting for the GOVERNMENT to act – like in January, before the WHO had even declared that the coronavirus was transmissible from one person to another, German scientists had developed a test for the virus (and the public insurance funds agreed to pay for testing that February)]

Taiwan was alert and proactive

Partly because it’s near China and speaks the same language, Taiwan learned early that a “severe pneumonia” was spreading in Wuhan. But it was the proactive measures the island took that helped it avert a major outbreak.

  • On Dec. 31, the same day China notified the World Health Organization that it had several cases of an unknown pneumonia, Taiwan’s Centres for Disease Control immediately ordered inspections of passengers arriving on flights from Wuhan.
  • And despite poor relations with Beijing, Taiwan asked and received permission to send a team of experts to the mainland on a fact-finding mission Jan. 12.

A government spokesperson reported “They didn’t let us see what they didn’t want us to see, but our experts sensed the situation was not optimistic,”

  • Shortly after the team returned, Taiwan began requiring hospitals to test for and report cases. That helped the government identify those infected, trace their contacts and isolate everyone involved, preventing the virus from spreading to the community.

All this happened long before Taiwan confirmed its first case Jan. 21 and the rest of the world became alarmed.

Taiwan set up a command centre

  • Equally important, Taiwan’s Centres for Disease Control (CDC) activated the Central Epidemic Command Centre (CECC) relatively early on Jan. 20 and that allowed it to quickly roll out a series of epidemic control measures.
  • Taiwan has rapidly produced and implemented a list of at least 124 action items in the past month or so — that was three to four per day — to protect public health. The policies and actions go beyond border control because they recognized that that’s not enough.

The command centre not only investigated confirmed and suspected cases, it also worked with ministries and local governments to coordinate the response across Taiwan, including allocating funds, mobilizing personnel and advising on the disinfection of schools.

Taiwan took quick and decisive action

  • Taiwan also took tough action early. On Jan. 26, five days after it confirmed its first case, Taiwan banned arrivals from Wuhan, earlier than any other country.
  • Not long after, it did the same for flights from all but a handful of Chinese cities, and only Taiwanese people were allowed to fly in.

Taiwan used technology to detect and track cases

  • After securing its borders, Taiwan used technology to fight the virus. Temperature monitors were already set up at airports after the 2003 SARS outbreak to detect anyone with a fever, a symptom of coronavirus.
  • Passengers can also scan a QR code and report their travel history and health symptoms online. That data is then given directly to Taiwan’s CDC.
  • Those coming from badly affected areas are put under mandatory 14-day home quarantine, even if they are not sick, and are tracked using location sharing on their mobile phone. Absconding or not reporting symptoms can lead to heavy fines like say $10,000.
  • The authorities in Taiwan also quickly determine whom the confirmed cases had been in contact with, and then test them, and put them in home quarantine. They also proactively find new cases by retesting those who tested negative

Taiwan ensured availability of supplies

  • To ensure a steady supply of masks, the government quickly banned manufacturers from exporting them, implemented a rationing system and set the price at just 16 cents each.
  • It also set up new production lines and dispatched soldiers to staff factories, significantly increasing production.
  • These masks are the tools for residents in Taiwan’s densely populated cities to protect themselves; they made them feel safe and not panic.

Taiwan educated the public

  • The government also asked television and radio stations to broadcast hourly public service announcements on how the virus is spread, the importance of washing hands properly, and when to wear a mask, as only when information is transparent, and people have sufficient medical knowledge, will their fear be reduced
  • Residents learned that most patients had mild or no symptoms, so the death rate could be lower than what was reported. They also understood that a person’s travel history or contact with infected individuals determined their risk level, not their nationality or race. That understanding helped reduce discrimination.

Taiwan got public buy-in

  • The public’s cooperation with the government’s recommended measures was crucial to prevent the spread of the virus, including among students
  • More than 95 percent of parents took their child’s temperature at home and report it to the school before the children arrived, as regardless of what the government does, people had to take responsibility for their own health.
  • Some businesses checked the temperature of employees arriving for work, using a detection camera
  • Offices stocked up on alcohol disinfectants and temperature guns. Practically every office building, school and community sports centre check temperatures and prevent anyone with a fever from entering. Apartment buildings also place hand sanitizer inside or outside elevators

Taiwan learned from experience

  • Taiwan put the lessons it learned during the SARS outbreak in 2003 to good use. That epidemic ended up killing 73 people and hurting the economy [China, Hong Kong and Taiwan were the worst affected countries]. This time, Taiwan’s government and people were prepared, and that readiness paid off.
  • The country’s health insurance system, which covers 99 percent of the population, was crucial to fighting the spread of the outbreak, as Taiwan’s health insurance lets everyone not be afraid to go to the hospital. If you suspect you have coronavirus, you won’t have to worry that you can’t afford the hospital visit to get tested. You can get a free test, and if you’re forced to be isolated, during the 14 days, food is paid for, as is lodging and medical care, so no one would avoid seeing the doctor because they can’t pay for health care

[However somewhat surprisingly, Taiwan, with a population of almost 24 million, currently conducts only around 800 screenings a day and not everyone under quarantine is tested]

Conversely, apart from Taiwan, elsewhere in the world, the spread of coronavirus and death goes on unabated, doesn’t it? Yep, it may have originated from Wuhan China last December, but has since travelled around the globe rapidly and relentlessly at increasing pace, so has been identified in over a hundred-and-eighty countries of 6 WHO regions so far, yet in most places no effective action has been taken to stop it, has it?

No, and it inevitably reached and pretty quickly established large outbreaks in all regions of the UK and cases are increasingly occurring where the person infected or killed doesn’t have an underlying health condition or old, and hasn’t been in contact with anyone who has been overseas nor contact with a known infected person, which is an extremely worrying development, isn’t it?

Some countries are testing patients for coronavirus by the tens of thousands daily as was the UK’s previously ‘unachieved’ plan of mid-March and the criteria for testing here had narrowed to only the most severe cases.

Well over ½ MILLION PEOPLE have now been tested in UK but the UK still has a record as one of the lowest rates in Europe, behind the likes of Russia, Germany, Italy, Turkey, and Spain

There had been growing concern that the UK was only managing to test 5,000 people a day, had struggled to pass 8,000 a day, and had hovered around 15,000 tests per day, despite aims to increase tests to 10,000 and then 25,000 a day and that despite the fact that capacity had increased certainly to 51,000 per day – which is still far short of the 72,000 a day that Germany was managing, or the UK’s commitment of 100,000 by the end of April (that looked bloody unrealistic one has to say?). The latest published figure however claimed that 120,000 tests in a day had in fact been carried out on 30 April, so to everyone’s surprise the government ‘apparently’ had indeed met the 100,000-test target (albeit though it turns out otherwise, as there was a bit of a fiddle going on by counting-in some 40,000 test kits delivered either to home addresses (27,497) or to official test sites that hadn’t actually been used/returned so were ‘unverified’ and may not really have been taken and indeed may never be taken, and had Hancock perhaps included also booked tests with ‘no-show’ or ‘cancelled test’ participants, eh? [although it was said officially that 122,347 tests were carried out, at MOST that figure should be 82,347 but nevertheless a significant achievement, surely?]

This manipulation of the numbers was in fact an unnecessary fudge factor, as it had been widely trailed by ministers that the target figure was ‘probably’ going to be missed and the public had been ready to accept that, but would indeed give credit for what had been achieved in increasing the number of tests – as it is, the needless skulduggery, lack of transparency, and massage of the figures, instead of simply admitting the truth of a minimalistic failure, will not only have disappointed the public but it could undermine public confidence and that could prove problematic downstream when the government might need future public buy-in, don’t you think?

Previously, no explanation had been forthcoming about why we had FAILED all the previous targets, nor how that was to be overcome to allow the new one or others to be achieved, so that’s not very tolerable, is it?

Moreover, is that why since the end of April, each day at the start of THIS new month of May there was a significant drop-off EVERY single day in numbers of tests conducted against the 100.00 target, perhaps? [following-on from the claimed ‘triumph’ of meeting the goal of 100,000 tests a day, the government has now set out a new target of capacity for 200,000 tests a day by the end of May – a goal immediately dismissed by medics and opposition figures as a STUNT to distract from 6 May Wednesday’s 30% shortfall, with just 69,463 tests carried out or posted to recipients].

[Unfortunately, also the effort to ‘ramp up’ testing may have come too late, as the UK appears to have passed the initial peak and yet the ‘overall’ death rate continues to climb]

New testing arrangements had beenannounced and recently introduced, together with a commitment to recruit 18,000 people to trace contacts of those infected [a bit late, eh? Moreover, only 1/5th of those recruited will be trained public heath staff working on the ground with the majority simply being ‘call handlers’ when we have seen the experience of Singapore showing that nearly all of the work there was done by physical contact tracers].

However, senior members of the UK government have recently conceded that the official launch date of 1 June 2020 for the UK contact-tracing app is set to be missed and that the date will NOT now be met

Furthermore, regarding an integral part of the Government’s ‘test, track and trace’ strategy, the critical element of TRACING needed to defeat the virus, the UK in typical head in the sand style have once AGAIN ignored the experience of others and finds itself almost alone with a CENTRALIZED infrastructure virus contact-tracing app that probably WON’T work well, as we have decided to use a discredited CENTRALISED type tracking system instead of a localised one. Just a further example of Britain sleepwalking into yet ANOTHER unnecessary coronavirus BLUNDER by failing to listen to global consensus and expert analysis as being shown with our impending release of the NHS COVID-19 contact-tracking app – now the NHS itself will have to consider ditching its model of the app in favour of the Apple and Google preferred system. (a month ago GERMANY did a U-turn on building its own centralized COVID-19 contacts tracing app and will instead adopt a decentralized architecture, while just last week Columbia became the latest country to mothball its efforts to build such a contact-tracing app, after it was beset by technical problems (now it is moving over the tech giants’ model – that leaves FRANCE and the UK as the ONLY two main regional backers of centralized apps for coronavirus contacts tracing)


You see with coronavirus contact-tracing, the World is split between two types of app (those that are centralized and those that are decentralized) and we have like idiots made the more risky choice to use a bespoke iOS and Android smartphone application which has unwarranted claims that it is a better solution to the one by Apple and Google which is one which OTHER nations have decided to adopt. [the UK’s APP has of course just undergone trials in the Isle of Wight, where over 30,000 people downloaded it, but residents say that it fails to work even on just ‘four-year-old’ phones and has other glitches like phone battery draining problems and users being bombarded with multiple notifications]

Unfortunately for us in UK, while the government’s explanation in favours of their App is coherent, calm, well-reasoned and plausible, and it is likely to be a repeat of the disastrous “herd immunity” approach the government initially backed as a way to explain why it DIDN’T NEED to go into a national lockdown. That policy was also well-reasoned and well-explained by a small number of very competent doctors and scientists who just happened to be WRONG.

There are broadly two types of coronavirus contact-tracing apps.

  • The first takes data from people’s phones and saves it on a CENTRAL system where experts are ‘trusted’ to make the best possible use of the data, including providing advice to people as and when necessary.
  • The second, decentralized approach, as set out by Apple and Google, puts USERS themselves in more control of their information, and alerts them AUTOMATICALLY with no intervention from a third party. Apple and Google have also banned apps that use their anonymized API from accessing location services to track and identify people, despite pressure to do so. And they have said they will only allow one App per country, or state in the US, to use the interface.


Both types use Bluetooth to detect nearby phones also running the software. Thus, when someone catches the coronavirus, people can be warned if their phone was within 6ft of that patient’s phone for more than a few minutes.

So-called HEALTH SERVICE EXPERTS have access to all the data collected from the smartphone and make a JUDGEMENT call on how to deal with matters – they can use risk modelling and some analysis to decide WHICH contacts are MOST at risk, and then notify them OR NOT to take some action

The argument is that while the Apple-Google decentralized model PROTECTS people’s privacy, it leaves the authorities blindsided. Meanwhile, the undertone of the centralized NHS method, where people’s data is collected and analysed together, is almost explicit: we all know how important privacy is but the government suggest we let it leave this to the experts. You see there is a major problem in that the NHS’s approach requires MAJOR smartphone software WORKAROUNDS to properly function so probably won’t work as well as expected, and probably won’t be really accurate at measuring the spread of the virus (Apple’s iOS normally forbids applications from broadcasting via Bluetooth when running in the background, which means that one would have to leave a contact-tracing app open in the foreground ALL the time for it to work properly. However, the operating system does allow software, such as the NHS tracing app, to run in a special mode so that it can announce itself to nearby iPhones and iPads via Bluetooth, and listen out for copies of itself on other devices, even when in the background. However, there are strict limits to this, and for instance, Apple says the background announcements are designed to work ONLY with other iOS devices, though Android apps COULD be programmed to work around this. however, an iOS app’s transmissions may be delayed if, for example, the device is busy sending other data over Bluetooth, and the app has only TEN or so seconds at a time to WAKE UP and communicate with nearby phones running the contact-tracing app, or be killed or throttled back. Also performing many Bluetooth-related tasks require the active use of an iOS device’s onboard radio — and, in turn, radio usage has an adverse effect on an iOS device’s battery life. Meanwhile, Google Android versions 8 and later allow contact-tracing applications to announce themselves for ONLY a few minutes after the app falls into the background. The apps could run as a foreground service on Android all the time, with an icon present to say it’s active while other programs run in the foreground, though this ISN’T particularly BATTERY friendly NOR recommended by Google, and could lead to people SIMPLY NOT USING the app to preserve power

The NHS has insisted it has worked around these limits “sufficiently well” (whatever that means?) at least on iOS but nevertheless, compromises will have had to be made to work around both iOS and Android issues, rather than use the decentralized Apple-Google API that has all of this handled AUTOMATICALLY in the background by the operating system, which is kinder to battery life and potentially MORE ACCURATE. Some encounters between people may be MISSED either due to operating system incompatibilities, limits on execution and transmission, or because the software proves to be such a battery hog that people don’t bother with it, or forget to run the app.

The other concern with the UK approach is that while it insists it will keep data private, and location data will not be stored nor attached to individuals, the truth is that it will ONLY work as promised if that data is NOT kept PRIVATE and location data IS STORED and ATTACHED TO INDIVIDUALS.

While it is claimed that the app doesn’t have any personal information about users, and doesn’t collect users’ location and tries to ensure that users can’t work out WHO has become symptomatic” and that “it holds only anonymous data and communicates out to other NHS systems through privacy preserving gateways, whereas in fact the first thing the App does when a user installs and opens it is to ask for the users postcode, and logs the exact make of the phone.

Moreover, as soon as someone agrees to share their information with UK government – by claiming to feel unwell and hitting a button – 28 days of data from the app is given to a CENTRAL SERVER from where it can NEVER be recalled by the user. That data, featuring all the unique IDs you’ve encountered in that period and when and how far apart you were, becomes the property of the National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC)–that the data WILL NOT be deleted, and UK citizens will NOT HAVE THE RIGHT to demand it is deleted, but it can or WILL be used for future research.

A decentralised smartphone contact tracing system –would be likely to comply with both human rights and data protection laws. In contrast, a centralised smartphone system –is a greater interference with and may not actually be lawful regarding fundamental rights on both human rights and data protection laws

At the heart of this decision by the UK to fall back on the belief that a CENTRAL AUTHORITY is going to be a better solution, no matter what compromises have to be made, is that central planning will work better when it comes to COVID-19?

The UK government is also considering using the Apple-Google approach after all, given that its own App may not actually work


Those who can now register for a test include the people (and their families) of:

        • NHS
        • Social care workers
        • Police officers
        • Teachers
        • Justice system workers
        • Supermarket and food production workers
        • Journalists
        • Undertakers
        • Transport workers
        • Over 65’s with symptoms


Previously, a smaller group of key workers – those whose work is deemed critical to the Covid-19 response – were eligible for testing. The aim is to allow essential staff to safely return to work.

[The invasive test involves taking a swab of the nose and the back of the throat, and it is said that the “majority” of people will get their result in 24 hours]


The government’s dedicated brand new website to allow key workers [there are an astounding 10 million of them (together with their families) needing to use it] to obtain home test kits or book tests was opened at 8am on Wednesday 24th April, but In true Laurel & Hardy comic style, typical of the UK’s crass handling of this crisis so far, the Department of Health was taken BY UTTER SURPRISE by its first day popularity [an immediate stampede of 46,000 workers], and the site either crashed or was quickly shut down when ALL 5000 home test kits (to be delivered by courier), were allocated WITHIN 2 MINUTES, and then ALL 15,000 ‘drive through’ test slots at regional centres were booked-out in UNDER 2 HOURS, and all applications were SHUT at 10am JUST TWO HOURS AFTER OPENING – with the website saying people could NO LONGER even register. (Not only that fiasco, but there were no checks that the people using the portal were in fact ‘key workers’ and so the ones eligible to use the service). Just 28,760 tests were carried out on the first day – so a long way short compared with the target of 100,000 tests per day by the end of April).

[Under this new scheme, test results from the drive-through sites supposedly will be sent out by text within 48 hours, and within 72 hours of collection of the home delivery tests]

Matters didn’t go all that much better with the portal on its second day on the Saturday morning either, as yet again it was overwhelmed within hours and test requests once more exceeded capacity in England and Wales – testing kits ran out (after 15 MINUTES this time) while its drive through test slots only lasted LESS THAN 1 HOUR. Reportedly however it appears that even if you as a ‘suspect positive’, have an appointment, and turn-up, it doesn’t mean that you’ll get that much needed test.

Well, those worrying issue have proved to be just ‘the tip of the iceberg’, as subsequently it has become apparent that the management of the national network of drive-in coronavirus drive-through testing centres has proved to be shambolic in terms of competence and accuracy of results (indeed doctors at three London hospital trusts are “actively discouraging” staff from using them, and instead Royal Free trust is swabbing staff at work and sending the results to an Institute’s laboratories for analysis.

Problems resulting have included long queues of up to five hours at some facilities after perhaps even a two-hour round trip to get there, with motorists – many of them already feeling unwell with symptoms of Covid-19 – stuck in their cars in hot weather for hours, forbidden from opening windows and unable to use toilets or find water, key-workers with appointments turned away because of delays, resultant leaking test vials, or wrongly labelled samples returned for lab testing, plus lost or delayed test results (with no contact number provided to chase missing results) – a husband and wife can have the test at the same place and time but one result comes back but  ‘delayed’ while the other is weeks later if at all – due to lab problems swabs are even having to be sent to America for results).  In addition, people attending a number of drive-in facilities reported being disgracefully left with no choice, but to take their own swabs, a most difficult task, having expected the procedure to be carried out by a trained professional (hardly surprising then if as amateurs they might get a potentially false negative result, eh?

Moreover, the results only indicate positive or negative with no indication whether or not that someone even with severe symptoms had previously had the disease and is immune.

The firms responsible for running things aren’t really properly qualified to do it – Deloitte accountants [managing logistics and data across most of the test centres, including booking tests, getting samples to the labs and communicating the results], with Serco, a services company, [managing the site facilities at some of the Covid-19 test facilities] and Sodexo, a services company in catering and care {involved in the set up and operation of ten Covid-19 testing centres across the UK and Ireland and provided test operatives to administer a throat and nasal swab test to key frontline workers but not responsible for getting test results back to them], or even Boots pharmacy [which apparently trained and provided more than 300 staff to administer swabs and managed the Nottingham site but has no role in processing the results].

Well, this significant level of failure is hardly surprising considering that the contracts to operate the facilities had been awarded under special pandemic rules, through a fast-track process without open competition, and were simply handed to somehow favoured private companies

It’s somewhat incomprehensible why such contracts were ever handed out so readily and casually to the likes of outsourcing firms Serco (majority of its turnover is generated from UK operations, but the company also operates in Continental Europe, the Middle East, the Asia Pacific region and North America), and Sodexo (a French multinational food, facilities and justice services multinational based in Paris) when they both already had form for past ‘catastrophic failures’ in performing multi-million pound government contracts. Serco has several contracts with the UK government, and had a number of failed contracts including a scandal over tagging criminals, and yet was even subsequently awarded this year a £200million contract to run two immigration removal detention centres in the UK despite obviously having failed to protect people in their custody in the past (including a string of sexual abuse scandals in its Yarl’s Wood facility). In health services, Serco’s failures included the poor handling of pathology labs and fatal errors in patient records. At St Thomas’ Hospital, the increase in the number of clinical incidents arising from Serco non-clinical management had resulted in patients receiving incorrect and infected blood, as well as patients suffering kidney damage due to Serco providing incorrect data used for medical calculations. A Serco employee later revealed that the company had FALSIFIED 252 reports to the National Health Service regarding Serco health services in Cornwall. Serco had also provided facilities management services at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Leicester Royal Infirmary, Wishaw General Hospital and at Plymouth’s Derriford Hospital. The company had the contract for out-of-hours GP services in Cornwall from which it withdrew from in December 2013 after the company left the county SHORT OF DOCTORS. The company also said it would stop running Braintree hospital in Essex as it pulled out of managing GP services and large hospitals. It emerged in November 2013, that Serco, which won a contract for Suffolk Community Healthcare in 2012, had 72 vacancies after earlier cutting 137 posts. Problems identified by Ipswich and East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group include “staff capacity, skill mix, workload, succession planning and morale, training, communication, mobile working, care co-ordination centre processes, incidents and near miss incidents

In its Probation services work Serco was stripped of its responsibility for tagging criminals in late 2013 and it paid £70m to the government in December of that year after it overcharged the government on the contract. (a £19.2m fine included a 50 per cent discount because Serco reported the problems itself and co-operated with the investigation)

In April 2014 Serco revealed that it would lose almost £18 million on three of its NHS contracts. The firm has made provisions for losses in its Braintree and Cornwall contracts, which were cancelled early. It has also made provisions for losses in its contract for services in Suffolk. The company claims it will take longer to deliver the operational efficiencies it hoped for, despite saying in May 2013 that it expected to make a profit on the three-year, £140 million contract for community services. It said that staff had not recorded activity accurately on the Electronic health record and that activity had increased significantly during the course of the contract.

In August 2014 it was reported that the company had decided to withdraw from the clinical health services market in the UK after a review of the cost of delivering “improved service levels” and meeting the performance requirements of several existing contracts

Serco as part of government prison privatisation, has a contract to run HMP Thameside in Hampshire, which is one of the 14 are privately run ones amongst 134 prisons in England and Wales. It was given the lowest performance rating of one.

We now have a higher percentage of privatised prisons than the US even though privatised prisons cost us more than public prisons. Privatised prisons house 15% of our prison population, yet the government spends 23% of its prison budget on private prisons. The maths just doesn’t add up

Riots, drugs, and staff losing control

2013, two of the three worst performing prisons in the country were privately run. For the past 17 years, private prisons have been more likely to hold prisoners in overcrowded accommodation than public sector prisons. Over one third of people in private prisons were held in overcrowded accommodation in 2014-15. Fewer and less well-trained staff means that private prisons also do worse in terms of security than prisons in our public sector. Serco, and Sodexo –two of the three international, multi-billion-pound corporations currently running our prisons – have both had problems with security.

In 2016, there was drug-fuelled violence at Sodexo’s Forest Bank prison and violence at a Doncaster prison run by Serco was revealed to be four times higher than at other similar sized prisons. When private companies cut costs by reducing staff and training, they make both staff and inmates in our prisons vulnerable].

In 25 July 2013 the privately-run prison HMP Thameside, run by Serco, was among three the government has expressed “serious concern” over, Ministry of Justice (MoJ) ratings had revealed that it was given the lowest performance rating of one.


Critics had previously questioning the UK’s initial decision only to test people for coronavirus in hospitals and NHS workers, arguing that a return to testing more widely would ultimately be necessary to suppress the virus. It seems certain that a policy of mass community testing will be essential to identify new hotspots, as has happened in South Korea, and so eventually end the current minimalistic lockdown the UK has had now for seven weeks.

Before the UK, South Korean officials were setting up “drive-thru” coronavirus screening facilities, and manufacturers in China have the capacity to distribute more than 1.5 million tests a week. Some countries, alongside Italy and the U.K., are testing tens of thousands of people for the coronavirus, in many cases processing thousands of samples a day.

Reportedly, the UK did previously have the capacity to process tens of thousands more tests for coronavirus but had failed to organise itself properly and there had been calls for the UK to make use of testing machines in every university and big hospital around the country, and set up mobile testing units like Ireland, which is testing far more people per head of population

There are 44 molecular virology labs in the UK and if they had been doing 400 tests a day Britain would be up to Germany levels of testing and that is perfectly feasible. Public Health England (PHE) was slow and controlled and only allowed non-PHE labs to start testing some while ago but that was only after the strategy shift to end community testing

A BioMedomics, 15-minute coronavirus blood test, claimed 80% accurate, is not being used in the UK (because health officials here have yet to approve it), despite China, Italy and Japan diagnosing patients with it. The test, which takes a blood droplet from a finger prick, and shows results in a pregnancy-test fashion, allegedly shows the severity of coronavirus infection in a patient within minutes even if they don’t show symptoms, and could potentially save delays in diagnosis [Public Health England currently used swab tests take up to 48 hours to be read by lab specialists]. A FINGER PRICK TYPE CORONAVIRUS BLOOD TEST IS THE ONLY WAY FORWARD FOR MASS COMMUNITY TESTING AND WILL BE AN ESSENTIAL TOOL IN DEFEATING THE VIRUS

Many of the countries that have had the greatest success in containing the disease are ones that were most responsive as they were affected by SARS in 2002-03. The memory of that crisis may have led to better preparedness,, both within government and amongst the population, and to a greater acceptance of people to comply with restrictions on movement and daily life, to prevent the spread of infection.

There are three main aspects to controls that aim to stop the spread of the disease:

  1. The first is travel bans on people from areas with high levels of cases (initially mainland China, now many more places)
  2. the second is quarantine rules to prevent known or suspected carriers from spreading infection; and
  3. the third is shutdowns and social distancing to prevent transmission between unidentified carriers by reducing human contact.

Now, the British government seems to have early-on adopted the attitude that such full-on controls may have proved to work well in other countries but were not appropriate or needed in the UK – they preferred to do virtually NOTHING and rely instead on an approach of on a wing and a prayer, to somehow halt the virus, eh?

[Boris Johnson to the horror of the World Health Organisation, was (and still is?) pursuing a strategy of gradually attempting to achieve UK “herd immunity” so had resisted even the current pseudo-lockdown in the UK (lockdown of most of the deemed ‘unessential’ businesses, with people only allowed to leave their homes under limited circumstances), but he was galvanised into imposing it only after Imperial College published its controversial, non-peer-reviewed, results of mathematical modelling that predicted a total failure to control the virus here with 1/4million deaths resulting]

NOTE: Moreover, the PM dithered for ten days when UK lockdown was recommended at Cobra on March 14th, with infection rate DOUBLING EVERY 3 DAYS in late February and early March, and the population was allowed and indeed encouraged to carry-on as NORMAL, including attending major public events like the Cheltenham horse racing FESTIVAL (March 10th) and Champions league football at LIVERPOOL (March 11th), while Johnson delayed imposing ANY lockdown until March 23rd.

Modelling teams from IC London and Oxford Uni now estimate the consequence of that tardy hesitancy in such a crucial period, was that UK coronavirus case numbers simply soared by an extra 1.3MILLION, making us the ONLY large European nation to let virus infections get so out of control before locking-down – hence we were the worst virus affected Country between Italy, Spain, France and Germany before entering a lockdown and that late lockdown here has meant that a we suffered a much greater than necessary number of hospitalisations and significantly more avoidable British deaths (as many as (as many as ¾?). The government’s EXCUSE for this crass incompetence? No admission of fault nor failure, and despite the glaring evidence to the contrary, simply a claim that “OUR STRATEGY HAS BEEN DESIGNED AT ALL TIMES TO PROTECT OUR NHS AND SAVE LIVES”

Herd Immunity

This is a term used to describe a form of indirect protection of susceptible members of a population from infectious disease and the resistance to the spread of a contagious disease within a population, that results if a sufficiently HIGH PROPORTION of individuals are IMMUNE to the disease, especially if achieved through vaccination (but can also result through previous infections when protection is via antibodies already in the blood produced by the immune system).

Herd Immunity provides the protection of the population as a whole brought about by the presence of immune individuals within it, giving a measure of protection for individuals who are NOT immune.

(The level of vaccination needed to achieve herd immunity varies by disease)


end October 2016; Exercise Cygnus  – NHS and authorities conducted a test of their  joint ability to cope with a flue pandemic and the RESULT was FAILURE as the NHS was stretched beyond breaking point [UK reaction – government made the decision that the UK would do NOTHING and simply let any pandemic OVERWHELM’ the Country (as it has!). Britain assumed a deadly virus would cripple the NHS and kill up ¾ million people (the assumption that a new virus could not be contained is also explicitly stated in the government’s pandemic strategy documents):

end December 2019; China alerted the WHO about unusual pneumonia in Wuhan [UK reaction – nil):

early January2020; virus identified as new [UK reaction – nil):

end January 2020; the WHO declare global emergency [UK reaction – nil):

early February 2020; first transmission within UK [UK reaction – government decides NOT to follow Italy and China in imposing restrictions):

early March; the WHO declared the outbreak a pandemic [UK reaction –discussed in the UK government’s annual budget, and the government advised that anyone with a new continuous cough or a fever should self-isolate for seven days, schools were ‘asked’ to cancel trips abroad, and people over 70 and those with pre-existing medical conditions were ‘advised’ to avoid cruises:

mid-March 2020; France and Italy have mandatory locked-down [UK reaction – an unbelievably irresponsible decision to abandon widespread community testing and contact tracing – so the start of the much disputed ‘herd immunity’ phase of the UK strategy (all to the shock of scientists and in direct defiance of the WHO’s advice for all governments to test, test, test), 2020 United Kingdom local elections were postponed for a year, and the UK government ‘advises’ against non-essential travel and contact, and ‘recommends’ home working, NHS England announces that all non-urgent operations in England would be postponed from mid-April to free up beds, and PM advised everyone in the UK against “non-essential” travel and contact with others, and Chancellor announces that £330bn would be made available in loan guarantees for businesses affected by the pandemic – NHS has shortage of personal protection equipment]:

late March 2020; on 23rd government orders orders pubs, eateries and gyms to close and announces a mild ‘stay-at-home order’ pseudo lockdown including a series of strict social measures, with the closure of non-essential shops and the banning of social gatherings, while ordering members of the public to stay at home with only a few exceptions, Health Secretary announces that everyone in Britain over the age of 70 would be told to self-isolate “within the coming weeks”, and the Driver and Vehicle Standards Agency announced that all pending practical and driving theory tests were to be postponed, in the case of practical tests for at least 3 months, and up to and including 20 April for theory tests, Johnson announces tightened measures to mitigate the virus in order to protect the NHS, with wide-ranging restrictions made on freedom of movement, enforceable in law for a planned period intended to last for at least three weeks. The public have been now ‘ordered’ to “stay indoors” and to only leave the house for one of these four reasons: Shopping for basic necessities such as food and medicine (Shopping trips should be as infrequent as possible); One form of exercise a day such as a run, walk, or cycle (This should be done alone or only with people you live with); Any medical need, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person (This includes moving children under the age of 18 between their parents’ homes, where applicable and Key workers or those with children identified as vulnerable, can continue to take their children to school); Travelling to and from work, but only where work absolutely cannot be done from home. The government has announced strict social distancing measures, banning gatherings of more than two people (It was publicized that the police have powers to impose fines on those breaking the stringent rules, and can disperse gatherings)]. The number of UK coronavirus deaths jumped by more than 100 in a day for the first time.

While the UK government claims that its new measures are strict, they’re not really so, and certainly still not anywhere near as draconian as those put in place even in other European countries, are they?

However, as the number of coronavirus cases and deaths continue to rise incessantly here in the UK, more dramatic and effective measures will surely be needed in the near future to stem its spread and in order to protect life, won’t they? [Enforced lockdowns could be applied countrywide or only to major towns and cities like London (which certainly because of its population and property density and the tube, even inexperienced people just knew London should have been in complete shutdown previously, but now because of cowardly culpable mismanagement that has currently resulted in some eighteen thousand confirmed deaths and rising, so it is continuing to suffer abominably in terms of coronavirus spread)

early April 2020; the government announced that a total of 2,000 NHS staff had now been tested for coronavirus since the outbreak began, and the Health Secretary announced a “five pillar” plan for testing people for the virus, with the aim of conducting 100,000 tests a day by the end of April. [a five-year-old has died from the virus, believed to be the youngest UK victim to date]


The later figures came as government data showed that new infections had got close to 6,000 again calling into question the idea that demand for tests would be falling. After the UK’s death toll became the worst in Europe a week ago, and since then further deaths take the total this Tuesday to 36,914

Britain has now massively overtaken China with the number of coronavirus cases as well as deaths and we are number six in the cases table headed by the USA.


There has been a dramatic escalation in the number of new daily coronavirus cases which in early March was still under 50 a day but that has now jumped into the thousands a day, which amply indicates that the UK’s slow response coupled with government’s virtually zero efforts to contain it, have been disastrous. We missed the window of opportunity in the first weeks and ignored the warning signs from other countries and went in a totally different direction to the rest of the world, so Britain is inevitably now paying the price with countless needless deaths

Some people, including even a few professionals, early on said that too much was being made about this virus in the media because we knew how to deal with, and could handle, a flu epidemic, but that’s utter rubbish, not least because the evidence NOW is that we certainly DIDN’T! It’s true that there was no need for the public to panic, nor for the food stockpiling that’s cleared supermarket shelves, but a dose of reality is the best protection and the reason the virus has been spreading more rapidly here recently in the past couple of months [numbers are doubling every few days] and is not being contained effectively in the UK (as was the government’s planned Stage), is that initially the population wasn’t worried enough, so didn’t take the simple health precautions steps to protect themselves and others, at a time when the government hadn’t and hasn’t implemented a proper lockdown, nor is doing sufficient testing, don’t you think?

Those of us who have been closely following and analysing our own daily stats have found it disturbingly difficult to keep abreast of it all as the situation changes so rapidly and is frighteningly out of control EVERYWHERE, with cases and deaths simply skyrocketing hourly, and often there is different public information published from different WHO sources and not all countries’ figures are reliably up to date, or based on appropriate testing.

In an unbelievable escapade of government mismanagement of its virus shambolic response, its misleading of the public about the scale of the pandemic, and its adept failure to learn anything from the experience of other countries, there is now exposed the avoidable crisis that has hit the UK Care Homes. Not only is there the scandal of Care Homes not being able to obtain PPE because delivery had been paltry and haphazard, hence putting residents and staff at high risk, but now we find out that outbreaks in over 3,000 Care Homes have resulted in an astronomical death toll, which has been kept well-hidden and pretty secret when it hasn’t been declared in daily official UK death figures (which until the end of April ONLY covered hospital deaths and not Care Homes nor Community deaths). It has though recently been estimated (lack of testing means no firm number) that some 7,500 have actually died in Care Homes, which would add some fifty percent to the UK’s official deaths figure, and it is substantially higher (over 5 times so) than a previous estimate and it compares most dramatically with the Office for National Statistics figure of just 217 Care Homes deaths up to early April (which is just 3% of it).

However, there is a major issue surrounding care deaths in the community skewing statistics because due to lack of universal testing, GPs, particularly if there had been other coronavirus cases around, are too readily adding ‘Covid-19 related’ or ‘suspected coronavirus’ to certificates of naturally occurring deaths of ‘frailty due to old age’ even if the person had not ever been tested, let alone been found to be positive for the virus, and moreover to the unease of relatives this is being recorded when no symptoms were present or displayed at all by their loved-ones

Another more worrying factor about Care Homes is that the carers themselves will generally live in the community and being unprotected and closely exposed to the virus at work, they will inevitably be bringing it back to their own family homes, as well as spreading it far and wide as they travel around their locality.

Now then, NOT ONLY are Care Homes residents generally highly vulnerable, and more so when in an act of murderous recklessness, hospitals were twice instructed (in mid-March & early April) as a matter of policy to offload and discharge hundreds of elderly patients, whether or not virus positive or merely untested, to Care Homes [so within 2 weeks, in early April, that resulted in an accelerated death rate in Care Homes (more than twice the hospital rate at that time – Care Home deaths go up as hospital cases fall! Figures show that a third of all coronavirus deaths in England and Wales are now happening in care homes], BUT there was ample warning to the government that Care Homes could be a potential problem here, as it had been widely reported in the UK press in late March that corpses of the elderly were found abandoned in Spanish Care Homes and other residents were left to their own fates – teams of soldiers deployed and sent to disinfect nursing homes in Madrid found elderly residents abandoned, and others dead in their beds. What was the response and the British government’s action to what should have been a red flag warning– ZILCH!

In context then, just remember that Matt Hancock’s (in post since 2018) full title is in fact Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, , so he is equally responsible for care in the community and Care Homes, as he is for health and NHS hospitals, but what we have seen, at a time when there has been decades of neglect and lack of funding for care, is that there has been a disastrous disregard and lack of priority for the care sector which with its front line staff was forgotten and abandoned and that was combined with an unwarranted total precedence being given to the NHS and its health issues instead, haven’t we?? It has been self-evident for decades that NHS and Care are two sides of the same coin, so they have to be a single NHS combined unit and cannot be run as competing parallel operations, as has been clearly demonstrated by their fiaso handling in this pandemic, eh?

Meanwhile, at the other side of the globe, we have New Zealand which has ‘won the battle’ against community transmission of Covid-19. Its prime minister, Jacinda Ardern, had previously announced, without complacency, that the country had ‘avoided the worst’ in the pandemic, and although it must continue to fight the virus, nevertheless it has done what few countries have been able to do and has ‘currently’ stopped the widespread, undetected, community transmission of coronavirus – consequently New Zealand lifted its level-4 lockdown (its most severe level) which had been in place for more than four weeks. During that time, almost all businesses have been closed, along with schools, while the population has been asked to remain in their homes for all but supermarket visits and short walks. That lockdown will be replaced by a level-3 one), which will see retailers, restaurants and schools allowed to reopen on a smaller scale. Schools were to reopen over a week ago for children up to Year 10 who cannot study from home, or whose parents need to return to work. Workers were also able to resume on-site work, provided they had Covid-19 control plan in place, with appropriate health and safety and physical distancing measures. It is expected one million New Zealanders would return to work [It’s said that whilst they are opening up the economy, they aren’t opening up people’s social lives] – and although the transmission of the virus had been “eliminated”, that did not mean zero cases, but that health officials ‘knew’ where all new cases were coming from – and to succeed they admit that they must now hunt down the last few cases of the virus, in a needle in a haystack task. [New Zealand’s R (transmission rate – the number of people each infected person can pass the virus to) was now under 0.4, compared to the average overseas transmission rate of 2.5]. (Level-3 was to be in place for two weeks before the cabinet decided on whether to move to level 2)

As New Zealand continues to rollback its coronavirus lockdown restrictions, shopping centres, cinemas, cafes and restaurants were due to open this week because there are now only 65 active  coronavirus cases in the country, out of 1,497 total confirmed COVID-19 infections. [with just 21deaths)

Other businesses deemed non-essential under alert levels three and four including cafes and retail stores can also open their doors again within the next couple of days.

The new alert LEVEL2 is effective from midnight on Thursday morning meanwhile schools can open again next week, but Bars have to wait until May 21 though before getting the green light to re-open, but then only if he number of active cases in the country remains at the current low level

New Zealand’s ultimate aim though is to eradicate Covid-19, not just suppress it (China is the only other country working to that ambition and China has done it – 1.4 billion people haven’t got the virus. They have been protected from it). New Zealand believes that they can do the same for their five million people and can protect them from the virus).

COMPARE NZ (which is defeating the virus) WITH UK (which has done anything but beat the virus) – they have levels of lockdown, but we don’t do levels of lockdown, do we? No, we seem to know better and ONLY have a relatively mild initial Level-0 introduced late as a fob, with no strict or severe levels to fall back on or implement at all, eh?

New Zealand’s has offered a model response of empathy, clarity and trust in science (for a pandemic response to be effective, science and leadership have to work together) which proved relatively successful as it has among the lowest cases per capita in the world. New Zealand is of course quite a small nation with a population smaller than New York City’s – but it is remote with easily sealable borders, which all played in its favour when the virus broke out. Their outcome has mainly been attributed to the clarity of the message coming from the government, a message that made sense, was delivered with excellent communication by an empathetic leader, whilst telling the public in detail the rules of the lockdown, which hence gained their trust [the government’s message was that of a country coming together as a team of five million, and urged people to “Unite Against Covid-19” as well as Be Strong. Be Kind, which resulted in a high level of compliance].

Unlike some others, New Zealand is a country that has strong working relationship with the science community, so scientists felt they had a great deal of influence and were likely to be heeded. Because it’s public health experts had carefully and calmly communicated the many complex health issues around Covid-19 that were paving the way for government decisions, and had clearly explained the trajectory the country was on in terms of the increase in the number of cases, when the government decided on going into a major lockdown, people fully understood why. In addition to demonstrate togetherness, the prime minister has announced that she, ministers in her cabinet, and public service chief executives, would all take a 20% pay cut for six months, to recognise the impact of the virus on other New Zealanders

A key to New Zealand’s response to Covid-19, was that the prime minister and government visibly put people’s health first, whereas other countries [like the UK indeed] which for whatever reason or for fear of the economic damage had delayed harsh action or the imposing of strict social distancing measures, subsequently had, and are having, a much harder time controlling the virus and it’s spread.

The background there, is that in mid-March, just after the World Health Organization (WHO) had declared a pandemic, New Zealand was about to mark the first anniversary of the Christchurch shooting with a national memorial event,

[Christchurch shooting: a 2019 terrorist attack, carried out by a single gunman in the capital, the largest city, (motives: Far-right politics, White supremacy, Islamophobia), with two consecutive mass shootings at separate mosques (51 deaths 49 injured)]

BUT things changed overnight, and not only was that particular large gathering event immediately cancelled, but despite only having 102 cases of coronavirus at the time, it was announced that almost everyone coming into New Zealand would have to self-isolate for 14 days. It was amongst the earliest and toughest self-isolation measures in the world, but which, a week later, was followed by a complete severe lockdown, During the first two weeks of lockdown, New Zealand saw a steady decline in the number of new cases. To date, it has had still over 1500 cases with only 21 deaths, and has confirmed that on average each infected person is passing the virus to fewer than one other person


While here in Britain, as at 26th May 2020, UK numbers are continuing to rise and 261,184 people here were confirmed as positive and now 36,914 patients who had tested positive for COVID-19 have died in the UK (Hospitals, Care Homes, & Community combined). [UK hospital deaths alone had escalated to close to a thousand a day but had since dropped back a bit (121 on 25 May, 494 on 14 May, 346 on 9 May, was 616 on 24 April, 717 on 14th April, and 980 on 10th April (the deadliest day of pandemic yet – a higher number in a single day than any EVER experienced by Italy or Spain, though of course in USA over 2,000 people have died in a 24 hrs period)]

However, in the UK the hospital death rate continues to fall, and the number of people in hospital with the virus had dropped by 14 per cent recently, with more than 3,200 critical care beds now empty. However, Care Home deaths are rising-up and the crisis in that sector is even deeper than feared with THREE QUARTERS of homes hit amid ‘shambolic’ government handling of PPE. Experts warn that the Care Home crisis won’t peak for MONTHS

Now, it turns out, that after the swine flu pandemic of 2009, Britain’s pandemic plan was updated, but however the UK Influenza Pandemic Preparedness Strategy took the view that it will NOT be possible to stop the spread of, or to eradicate, the pandemic influenza virus, either in THE COUNTRY OF ORIGIN (and yet China has done just that very thing?) OR IN THE UK, as it will spread too rapidly and too widely”, so the expectation must be that the virus will inevitably spread and that any local measures taken to disrupt or reduce the spread are likely to have very limited or partial success at a national level and cannot be relied on as a way to ‘buy time’. Whereinafter, the UK’s Pandemic Influenza Response Plan was produced in 2014, and astoundingly still remains in place despite the coronavirus outbreak and notwithstanding that the plan proving to be totally ineffective – it has only recently come to light in the public that that the NHS ‘failed a test of its ability to handle a full scale pandemic over three years ago’ [the testing, codenamed Exercise Cygnus, conducted a three day run on how the health service would cope with a major flu outbreak] but ‘ministers hid the “terrifying” results’ from the public (deemed to be too sensitive you see?), so it’s hardly surprising that it shows close similarities between the handling of the current Covid-19 outbreak, and as lessons obviously weren’t learned nor action taken under Jeremy Hunt’s watch [2012-2018] and that highlights why the UK have screwed-up so badly in handling coronavirus, doesn’t it? In 2018, Hunt became the longest-serving Health Secretary in British political history (so what’s his excuse for failure on this one, not least since the NHS already had visibility and the experience of the genetically similar SARS virus pandemic a decade before he was in post); later that year he then even got promoted to Foreign Secretary no less, the 3rd Great Office of State, but he now chairs the Health & Social Care Select Committee – so he is well placed to cover-up his incompetence in running the NHS, the Cygnus cover-up, and the resulting lack of action, so has he direct responsibility for what is likely to be in excess of 40,000 deaths in the UK, do you think?

Exercise Cygnus:

  • NHS hospitals, local authorities and major government departments were included in the operation that took place in October 2016.
  • Ministers were briefed on the results of Cygnus, which revealed that there were significant gaps in the NHS “surge capacity” and included a shortage of personal protective equipment (PPE), particularly N95 face masks (requiring action to increase their production), inadequate numbers of intensive care unit (ICU) beds, and a shortfall in morgue capacity
  • The NHS was stretched beyond breaking point [by Cygnus].

BUT WHAT’S THE BLEEDING POINT OF RUNNING SUCH AN EXERCISE LIKE CYGNUS IF YOU DON’T IMMEDIATELY DEAL EFFECTIVELY WITH THE RESULTS? These exercises are supposed to prepare the government for something like this coronavirus – but it appears they were aware of the problem but didn’t do much about it, didn’t spend a lot of time exploring how the Country could prevent it in the first place, but merely looked at how Britain could build up mortuary space and increase intensive care beds but only after the virus had already spread, so we HAD already made the decision that the UK would do nothing and simply let a viral pandemic ‘OVERWHELM’ the Country (as it has!) and let it kill ¾ million Brits in the process. An unbelievable capitulation from a once proud courageous Country – indeed the equivalent of us deciding in 1935 that we couldn’t fight another World War so would simply surrender if another country like Germany invaded us, eh?]

Britain purely relied on a ‘herd immunity’ strategy that was baked into Britain’s official pandemic plans, whereas Asian counties like Taiwan, South Korea, and Singapore had put in place ‘battle-plans’ to defeat any new viral outbreak and focused on enhanced mass testing capacity, , contact tracing, and huge stockpiles of protective equipment, as subsequently demonstrated in Taiwan with it’s prudent action, rapid response, and early deployment, which was then supported by a travel alert, and that combined with optimisation of border quarantine to identify important cases. [Taiwan also developed a policy of “sheltering” – a detailed plan for a complete lockdown, and also families had been advised to build up their own supplies of masks and gloves], while Singapore said all workplaces should stockpile protective gear. Nearly all the Asian countries, including Vietnam, Malaysia and Thailand, also had preparations in place for contact tracing to help stop the disease spreading

The British government has, even NOW, formally REFUSED to release the findings of Cygnus, as it has rejected a request under the Freedom Of Information Act to do so, but a frontline NHS doctor is mounting a legal ‘Judicial Review ‘challenge to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care to contest that refusal and is seeking its publication.

A senior Whitehall official involved in drawing up the Cygnus major test of this country’s pandemic preparations, has admitted that the UK was intent on ploughing its own furrow, so lessons from other countries had been “entirely ignored” and what they were doing in South Korea and places like that, was NEVER EVEN DISCUSSED (clearly, that was a BIG mistake) given the ongoing lack of testing capacity and repetitive shortages of PPE in Britain – AT LEAST 150 health and social care workers have now died of coronavirus and whose fault is that – their OWN, or MATT HANCOCK’s (who had said that PPE must be used responsibly – implying that the front line hero’s WEREN’T doing just that), or SOMEBODY ELSE’s, eh?]. Even some half of doctors have had to purchase their own PPE or use externally donated supplies from charities or local firms, due to non-availability of official NHS procurement supplies, and MORE than half of doctors felt only PARTLY protected at work and one in 10 DIDN’T feel protected AT ALL, eh?


An entire request can be refused if:

•It would cost too much or take too much staff time to deal with the request.

•The request is vexatious.

 In addition, the Freedom of Information Act contains a number of exemptions that allow withholding of information from a requester

Some exemptions relate to a particular type of information, for instance, information relating to government policy. Other exemptions are based on the harm that would arise or would be likely arise from disclosure, for example, if disclosure would be likely to prejudice a criminal investigation or prejudice someone’s commercial interests.


Despite the glaring evidence to the contrary, a Department of Health spokesperson has said (LIED) recently that ‘”The coronavirus outbreak calls for decisive action, at home and abroad, and the World Health Organisation recognises that ‘the UK is one of the most prepared countries in the world for pandemic flu’, and that as the public would expect, we regularly test our pandemic plans so ‘the learnings from previous exercises have helped allow us to rapidly respond to COVID-19’. We are committed to be as transparent as possible, and in publishing the SAGE evidence the public are aware of the science behind the government’s response”

One has for example to seriously question the UK’s policy of ‘seven-days isolation’ for suspected coronavirus cases, when public health expert doctors here have warned of a risk of infection beyond seven days from symptom onset [the UK guidance says people who develop symptoms should isolate themselves for seven days, whereas, the World Health Organisation (WHO) recommends DOUBLE that, and people should only end their isolation after 14 days without symptoms] – all other countries are working to the WHO guidelines on this, so just why does the UK think it always knows better, and as we’ve seen, has had to pay the consequences of increased cases of infection and moreover deaths – crass pig-headed stupidity, or what?

As of 26th May 2020, getting 4½ million cases worldwide have been confirmed, of which close to 2¼ million are active, and some 46 thousand remain classified as serious/critical (the first peak was at just 12 thousand).

Major outbreaks have currently occurred [ranked here in number order] in 1.USA, now by far the worse hit in case numbers 1,706,226 cases- 31% of all], 2.Brazil [376,669 cases – 7 % of all cases], 3.Russia [353,427 cases – 6% of all cases], 4.Spain [282,480 cases – 5% of all cases], 5.UK [261,184 cases – 5 % of all cases], 6.Italy [230,158 cases- – 3¼ % of all cases], 7.France [182,942 cases – 4 % of all cases], 8.Germany [180,789 cases- 3¼% of all cases], 9.Turkey [157,814 cases – 2¾ of all cases], 11.Iran 137,724 cases- 2½ % of all cases], 14.Central China, where it all started [82,992 cases – 1½ % of all cases], 13.Canada [85,711 cases – 1½ % of all cases], 10.India [145,456 cases- 2½ % of all cases], 19.Belgium [57,342 cases- 1 % of all cases], 21.Netherlands [45,445 cases- ¾ % of all cases], 28.Switzerland [30,746 cases ½% of all cases], 27.Portugal [30,788 cases –½%of all cases], 25.Sweden [33,843 cases – ½% of all cases], 41.Austria [16,539 cases – ¼% of all cases], 47.South Korea [11,225 cases –¼% of all cases], while some 350 thousand people have died [overall mortality rate is now 6.2%) – some 4,634 [just over 1¼ % of all deaths] are in mainland China so now some 99% (over 343 thousand) deaths are in other countries, but with 32,877 [9½% of all deaths] in Italy and 26,837 deaths in Spain [7¾ % of all deaths] although in total nearly 2½ million people are reported recovered [42% of all cases but actually down from about 55% some time ago]


Here in the UK, we have seen a shameful and an utterly ineffective government response to the grave dangers from this ongoing ‘of international proportions’ public health emergency and one which has involved a clueless Prime Minister, at the outset offering worthless platitudes of reassurance to the public and uttering the barefaced lie that Britain and the NHS was well geared-up to deal with what many of us predicted was undoubtably to be a mass-killer pandemic, eh? That is crass political and health stupidity when the bulk of us knew full well that the NHS is broke both financially and resource wise, so has been on its knees and trembling every year for decades now about the potential devastating impact on UK hospital resources of just an ordinary winter flu epidemic [which in the past half-decade has killed an estimated average of 17,000 people annually (but had a high of 28,330 in 2014/15) – in context the coronavirus has so far resulted in 36,914 deaths in the UK in just 5 months this year – more so, even a PM spokesperson had warned that the coronavirus was likely to spread significantly, as it indeed has!

The blatant lie has been fully demonstrated by subsequent events which have exposed facts like the NHS had insufficient bed capacity [at the twelfth hour the Government just a month ago commandeered the first of some ten makeshift hospital facilities planned (7 ‘Nightingale Hospitals’ at London, Birmingham, Manchester, Harrogate Yorkshire, Bristol, Washington NE, and Exeter, plus also 3 similar hospitals being set up in other countries Cardiff, Glasgow, & Belfast), with the first being the east London venue of the ExCeL centre, but at potentially some enormous expense (£3million a month in rent was to be charged by Adnec, the Abu Dhabi owners which would result in untold millions of NHS cost – that’s in stark contrast to another of the one planned, at the NEC in Birmingham [now operational as scheduled on 10th April with 500 beds and 5,000-bed capacity], owned by the American private equity giant Blackstone, which is providing the venue for free. That news resulted in Adnec backing down on their full billing plans – but saying only that it would scrap a ‘contribution to some fixed costs’ that had been demanded from the NHS)]. The temporary NHS Nightingale Hospital North West with up to 750 beds, located at the ex-Manchester Central railway station that had since been become the GMEX convention centre was converted to a hospital and opened following less than 3 weeks of work so was ready to receive patients on Easter Sunday – 13 April

The first NHS Nightingale Hospital (London) was officially opened on 3 April. As of 27th April 2020 five if the seven planned hospitals have been opened (so the 5 running are London, Manchester, Harrogate Yorkshire, Bristol, and Birmingham (a step-down facility) and the 2 still to open are Washington NE, and Exeter.

IF THESE HOSPITALS WERE INDEED REQUIRED FOR UK CAPACITY THEN WHY WEREN’T THESE BUILT AS PERMANENT HOSPITALS BEFOREHAND as they would have then had inherent value which they certainly don’t have when cuckooing in temporary premises, AND WHY DID JOHNSON SAY we had adequate facilities, do you think?

This new London hospital facility was built with the help of up to 200 soldiers a day (from the Royal Anglian Regiment and Royal Gurkha Rifles), working long shifts alongside NHS staff and over 160 contractors. The NHS have kitted it out, but again all at undisclosed substantial cost (£?million) and in 9 days (an amazing achievement) which had turned it into a makeshift 4000 bed coronavirus field hospital (now called Nightingale Hospital London) to cope with the impending peak of the epidemic. It has been fitted with the framework made from material usually used to make exhibition stands – because it is lightweight and could be constructed quickly – for more than 80 wards, each with 42 beds. Some 500 fully-equipped beds, with oxygen and ventilators, are already in place and there is space for another 3,500, but lack of staff resources (16,00 needed) means that in addition to those drawn from local hospitals and trusts, it will have to be staffed significantly with volunteer retired staff and military medical personnel.

[Excel’s existing electrical infrastructure had to be modified to ensure the power supply could cope with demand – and not cut out – and temporary generators and oxygen tanks, to supply the beds, have also been installed]

Then a couple of weeks ago, a successful national campaign was launched by government to sign-up ¼ million public volunteers to become NHS Volunteer Responders, who can be called on to do simple but vital tasks such as: delivering medicines from pharmacies; driving patients to appointments; bringing them home from hospital; or making regular phone calls to check on people isolating at home. [NHS Volunteer Responders apparently is not intended to replace local groups helping their vulnerable neighbours but is an additional service provided by the NHS (GPs, doctors, pharmacists, nurses, midwives, NHS 111 advisers and social care staff will all be able to request help for their at-risk patients via a call centre run by the Royal Voluntary Service (RVS), who will match people who need help with volunteers who live near to them].

Furthermore, it transpires that the NHS didn’t have anything like the required numbers (only a quarter) of ventilators needed by hospitals to help their critically ill respiratory patients to take a breath and avoid death [a ventilator takes over the body’s breathing process when disease has caused the lungs to fail – this gives the patient time to fight off the infection and recover] – WHY WAS THAT for goodness sake?

Well, for a start, the government didn’t order them earlier in this crisis, so other counties have secured the available manufactures’ stock and future output – leaving our government scabbling about trying to get UK companies like defence firm Babcock and engineering company Dyson, to take on ventilators as a new product line and possibly create new designs, no less? [indeed, the government has placed firm orders for 10,000 machines from Dyson] The UK needed an estimated 30,000 units to deal with the coronavirus peak but there were only 8,000 units then available, eh? The UK had hoped to source another 30,000 ventilators (but that requirement has subsequently been lowered to 18,000) for the NHS by ordering newly designed models, scaling up production of existing ones, and importing machines from overseas [the proven heavy-duty machine models suited for hospital use, are already made by the specialist UK firm Penion, while another specialist UK firm Smiths, currently produces a lightweight portable “paraPac” ventilator (how many units have been EXPORTED THOUGH instead of going to the NHS?)]. There were in fact subsequently 10,120 available ventilators, with around 1,000 acquired from the private health sector and the rest from imports and orders from small suppliers


  • [The large majority of people (80%) with Covid-19 – the disease caused by coronavirus – should recover without needing hospital treatment, but one person in six will likely become seriously ill and can develop breathing difficulties.
  • In these severe cases, the virus causes damage to the lungs. The body’s immune system detects this and expands blood vessels so more immune cells enter.
  • But this can cause fluid to enter the lungs, making it harder to breathe, and causing the body’s oxygen levels to drop.
  • To alleviate this, a machine ventilator is used to push air, with increased levels of oxygen, into the lungs.
  • The ventilator also has a humidifier, which modifies adds heat and moisture to the medical air so it matches the patient’s body temperature.
  • Patients are given medication to relax the respiratory muscles so their breathing can be fully regulated by the machine]

Apparently, also the government had previously failed to join an EU scheme to procure ventilators, because it had missed an invitation to do so owing to a ‘communication problem’, no less? OR was it a political decision, perhaps?

These are simply more glaring examples of centralised disgraceful failures to adequately deal with this mammoth health crisis by the incompetent Johnson government – all mouth and no trousers, you see?

Worryingly, despite the PM’s initial false assurances about our NHS resource capability, weeks ago some people who were confirmed to have contracted the virus were actually having to be treated at home rather than in hospital — some unfathomable and unsatisfactory NHS change of policy, don’t you think?

Well, just compare and consider the situation of lowly war ravaged for 20 years Vietnam, the easternmost country on the Southeast Asian Indochinese Peninsula and the 15th most populous country in the world (96 million), which might have been expected to have suffered a terminal blow by the ravages of Covid-19, but NOT SO in practice, despite the fact that is shares a 870 mile porous border to the North with China itself, and moreover faced other challenges including poverty, corruption and inadequate social welfare. Remarkably however, it suffered UNDER 300 VIRUS CASES and NOT A SINGLE VIRUS DEATH, and now begins to LIFT ITS LOCKDOWN, as it had employed a successful strategy of CONTAINING the virus – achieved by a TESTING regime combined with effective and diligent targeted CONTACT TRACING to halt the spread, by quickly identifying and physically tracking down potential carriers, and so to encircle small clusters of the disease, as well as the country having instituted a strategy of mass QUARANTINE of up to 80,000 people (initially arrivals from China, South Korea, Italy, Iran – half of them housed in government facilities like military barracks and university dormitories). Furthermore, all incoming international flights had been halted in late March

[ie ALL THINGS that the UK GOVERNMENT DIDN’T BOTHER TO DO, which explains just why we are in the Khazi and they are not, doesn’t it?]

While, Germany which may have a quarter less coronavirus cases as UK but we have had over 420 percent more deaths [and it has a LOW mortality rate of 23] and even Iran with some half of our cases has just a fifth of our fatalities – why, why, why? Well, it’s not by luck you can be sure. In the case of Germany, it might well be related to the level of testing and the fact that they started with the greatest number of intensive care beds and facilities of any country in Europe, don’t you think?

Despite recording 174,098 coronavirus cases, Germany has just 7,861 deaths – a lot fewer than the UK or France. It all comes down to a combination of demographics, testing, and chance

As the UK had very little direct exposure to the previous SARS virus from China [only four cases were recorded here, with zero deaths] no lessons were learnt from that outbreak. Now, regarding the current situation, in reality, the one and only practical thing that the UK government did at the outset about coronavirus was to launch a minimalistic lacklustre campaign to advise people to properly wash their hands with soap and water [aka the scrub-up a surgeon doctor does] – but that didn’t even attempt to properly explain the reasons why, so that message is likely to have been ineffective, isn’t it? It’s even more unlikely that such a message would be heeded when delivered by our ‘generally untrusted’ politicians – only health professionals should have been used for this important advice, don’t you think?

[Hand washing both helps people stop contracting coronavirus and also stops them spreading it. That is because apart from being airborne, the virus can live on and be picked up on, or be deposited by, hands from surfaces, like say door handles or taps, and then it gets ingested through eyes, ears, and mouth into your respiratory system.

Soap works on coronavirus and indeed most viruses because the virus is a self-assembled nanoparticle in which the weakest link is the lipid (fatty) bilayer. Soap dissolves the fat membrane and the virus falls apart like a house of cards and becomes inactive). SOAP IS IN FACT THE ‘MOST’ EFFECTIVE WAY TO DESTROY A VIRUS FROM THE SKIN OR INDEED ANY SURFACE OR ARTICLE and is much more effective than hand gels or wipes (and much much cheaper to boot)] 

The dirty truth is that men are particularly irresponsible about hand washing after urinating using a public toilet, and the majority [63 per cent in 2015 study] can’t be bothered to even do that basic but essential act of personal hygiene, so they will inevitably leave bacteria, bugs and disease behind for others to pick up [while it is perhaps less significant, women at 39 per cent aren’t quite as bad]

[Reportedly, bathroom-door handles have so much bacteria on them, you could use one to colonize Mars, and additionally, flushing actually launches aerosolized toilet funk into the air, which can travel up to six feet. That means virtually everything you touch in the bathroom could be coated with a fine mist of invisible poo particles so when toileting, it’s possible to have faecal material and faecal bacteria get onto your hands,” (by-products of ingesting faecal matter include E. Coli and hepatitis.)]

With respect to coronavirus risk alone the government should have, as a minimum surely, provided and forced all public toilets to display their hand-washing message on a printed notice or even to have required an automatic recording to be played to everyone using the facility (as happens on some cruise ships)?

Health and Social Care Secretary, hapless Matt Hancock, had publicly said he would do everything in his power to support the NHS, so why was there, and still is there, a substantial lack of Personal Protection Equipment available to those staff at the front end and not even sufficient numbers of aprons let alone specialized respirator masks to stop medical and care staff themselves getting coronavirus infected due to very close contact with infected patients and clients? Disgracefully, doubtless to cover-up for equipment shortages, the rules were suddenly relaxed and changed to instruct NHS staff to deal with potential coronavirus patients without using any PPE whatsoever or to reuse ‘single use’ deemed items, or to use PEE with multiple patients, or even to use just standard lab-coats, and that puts their own lives and safety at risk, doesn’t it? Hopeless Hancock should get on his bike

It is noteworthy that Chief Scientific Advisor Sir Patrick Vallance has now hit the media with a claim that he had signed-off a Whitehall risk assessment paper, and had warned Ministers last year, before Covid-19 emerged, that plans needed to be made by Ministers as there was a very-high risk of a viral pandemic hitting the UK that would be highly transmissible and highly virulent, meaning that half the population would be infected, and it would have a devastating impact regarding deaths and on the economy – he apparently he urged that pandemic preparation were made urgently, called for plans to bring home Brits stranded abroad, plans to monitor and contact-trace infected patients and manage a surge in deaths, and he also urged the stockpiling of PPE. NONE of these thigs actually happened though, did they?

NO. Well, Johnson and his other government ministers like Matt Hancock, now claim that the right steps have been taken at the right time, and furthermore, they have repeatedly and consistently said they have been guided throughout by the best medical and scientific advice – however the evidence would strongly suggest otherwise though (perhaps political influence as well has played a part?), and that SOMEONE’S definitely lying through their teeth with a smile, eh?

Its unfathomable why the British government didn’t at least screen here in some manner those thousands of people who had flown back from Wuhan in January or entering the Country from China, when it became obvious there was a major coronavirus health problem there, as was reported in December to the World Health Organisation (WHO), isn’t it? Certainly, we know that a student at York University and a relative are known to also have brought the virus back from China to York at the start of February.

In another astounding ball dropping ‘faux pas’ by the government and one which has doubtless cost many British lives, has been its crass incompetence and lack of foresight about the impending pandemic’s associated consequences. You see the British public and frontline staff have been badly let down by a government that took no action whatsoever to stop the vile profiteers who, as should have been ‘predicted’, have eagerly latched onto the myriad of opportunities offered by the war on the pandemic, whence for example we have seen suppliers of critical PPE, employing extreme exploitation of supply and demand and putting prices of their goods up by eight times when it was in tremendously short supply, as well as other companies blatantly manipulating their prices on essential goods or coronavirus protection products needed by the public such as viral spays, wipes, hand-wash, and facemasks (prices of masks and sanitisers up by as much as 2,000%), or even toilet rolls, to rake-in massive excess profits, which just WASN’T allowed in other countries, was it? N0, and we had already seen that the likes of Taiwan had ensured availability of face masks there by implemented a rationing system and setting the price at just 16 cents (about 30 pence) each, eh?

[Profiteering is not technically illegal unless it involves committing a crime]

While our government simply took no steps whatsoever to regulate prices of hand sanitiser or other protective kit or anything else relating to the coronavirus for that matter, it has been left to the likes of Amazon and eBay to act independently to remove tens of thousands of listings in a struggle to limit or prevent profiteering as the bad boys relentlessly attempted to cash in on coronavirus fears by raising prices.

Profiteering action is also known as Price gouging and occurs when a seller increases the prices of goods, services or commodities to a level much higher than is considered reasonable or fair. Usually, this event occurs after a demand or supply shock.

In Britain we failed to protect our fellow citizens, and particularly those who were most vulnerable like even frontline workers, when we should have been well aware of the prevalence of war profiteering, and indeed its occurrence in peacetime when ‘fear-based’ problems and hoarding conditions exist, as we inevitably have in a pandemic. Certainly, in WW2 the UK issued orders included maximum price controls to prevent businesses from profiteering and large fines were undeniably imposed on organisations that charged increased prices, or deliberately created shortages, or failed to meet production obligations set-out for the war effort. Many other countries, including most American States, DO have statutory prohibitions on price gouging, thus protecting people from exploitative increases in the costs of essential goods – in USA which become effective once a state of emergency or disaster has been declared by the President of the United States or the State’s governor

In what has become predictable reaction by the UK government during this crisis of ‘too little too late’, when the deed was done and the profiteers had already made their killing, the government set up about a month ago a new UK taskforce to crack down on coronavirus profiteers. The competition watchdog CMA (Competition and Markets Authority) has been asked (belatedly) to act against traders raising prices on goods and companies that cash in during the outbreak by bumping up prices or exploiting people’s fears with misleading claims about products [The CMA said it had already contacted traders and online trading platforms about excessive pricing of hand sanitiser, sales of which have soared as part of efforts to prevent the spread of the virus and action will be taken against firms that breach consumer protection or competition laws if they do not respond to warnings (WOW?). The taskforce will also advise government on emergency legislation if problems cannot be addressed through existing powers].

[On another matter, some five months after the horse had bolted, the governments is finally ‘planning’ to introduce (early next month), a two weeks’ quarantine restriction for returning UK citizens and foreigners arriving at UK airports and seaports (still no temperature testing for fever though, but incoming passengers would have to fill-out a health information based landing card and provide a committed address at which they will ‘self-isolate’ – touted as a radical plan, but it’s not really so formative, considering that it simply is a crib and replicates (though less stringently, as passengers themselves can choose where to stay and might not adhere to it?) one which Singapore had introduced  some 2 months ago, by issuing such notices to serve a 14-day self-isolation at dedicated Stay-Home Notice (SHN) facilities. to citizens, permanent residents and long-term pass holders, returning from abroad

This two weeks’ quarantine plan which is not to be applied selectively nor be symptomatically based will further ‘devastate’ the UK aviation industry and the British wider economy, so a much better idea would have been to allow people INSTEAD to undertake a CERTIFIED two weeks’ quarantine in their country of residence BEFORE actually traveling to the UK and indeed to put in place reciprocal arrangements HERE for British citizens, intending to travel abroad, to undertake just such a quarantine at government special dedicated STAY-HOME residential facilities setup say in military or university accommodation or even in diversely located specified hotels with own room and toilet, to have all their meals provided, and so avoid physical contact with other individuals – that should mean that they can subsequently travel overseas and not be subject to a quarantine there]

As there was a significant risk  monthsw ago of the virus becoming more widespread, we might have expected the UK government to have advised then against travel to certain counties or places and to identify the danger of going on cruises (which heightens the risk of coronavirus infection as passengers can come from many countries and are contained in large numbers in an enclosed environment wherever the ship is heading). Had the government done that, then people could have played safe and cancelled holidays and cruises and been covered by holiday insurance, but instead have put themselves at risk because the government had sanctioned their travel and holiday plans [note P&O have recently changed their cancellation policy because of coronavirus and bookings can now be deferred without financial penalty)

Another consideration had to be the cancelling of events involving large gatherings of people which enable rapid inter-contamination, but so far, the government haven’t done anything in that respect and indeed international canine event Crufts 2020 in Birmingham, to which around 160,000 people went (the lowest turnout ever seen because of coronavirus visitor fears) went ahead at the start of March, and ran for 4 days when some had said that the event was “too big to cancel over some unfounded fears”, eh?


The three UK sporting events that almost certainly have led to a coronavirus death spike, were The Cheltenham Festival, Liverpool’s tie with Atletico Madrid and the Manchester football derby all resulted in more coronavirus cases and deaths All three events, each attended by tens of thousands of people, many from overseas, were held between March 8 and 13 – after the virus arrived in Britain but ahead of the government late lockdown. Analysis, shows that each fixture is linked to between 2.5 and 3.5 additional deaths per day at local hospitals 20 to 35 days later, compared with similar hospital trusts which were used as a control This analysis suggests there IS a correlation between mass gatherings and infection and therefore mortality which needs to be investigated further.

The close proximity of people and likelihood of someone carrying the disease make transmission far more likely to happen

Then after Crufts followed-on the 2020 Cheltenham Festival horse racing, with its highlight day of the prodigious Gold Cup, which was somehow sanctioned by the UK government, so remained open and went ahead over 4 days (10 Mar 2020 – 13 Mar 2020) on the edge of the Cotswolds in the county of Gloucestershire,. It was NOT cancelled despite the coronavirus pandemic and valid fears that the virus could rapidly spread at the Festival [oh yes, the racecourse put in measures said to try to mitigate the threat – including bringing in extra toilets and staff to keep them hygienic, and setting up hand sanitiser stations around the course, but that was basically just a sop so they could say they were doing everything possible, but those extra facilities didn’t really made a scrap of difference to the risk, did they?

The organisers of the Cheltenham Festival, owned by of the Jockey Club, in a letter explaining why it was going ahead, despite concerns about the Covid-19 outbreak, have cited Boris Johnson’s rugby outing as a valid reason for its go-ahead. That justification invoked the presence of the PM at the England v Wales international rugby match at Twickenham on Saturday 7 March three days before the race meeting was due to begin [however, the Festival really cannot be compared with a rugby match (in the main, people go to a rugby match and then go home, whereas a significant number of people who went to the Cheltenham Festival stayed in the area and also went into the town – that hardly meets the ‘stay-at-home’ rule, does it?).

Also, the organisers reportedly claimed that the government guidance is for ‘the business of the country to ‘continue as usual’, while ensuring adherence to and promotion of the latest public health advice’. Bunkum?

The organisers quoted as well, the confusing advice from the then chief medical officer of Scotland, Catherine Calderwood, who said: “There’s actually very little impact on virus spread from mass gatherings, particularly if they are in the open air” (talk about mixed messages, eh?). Speaking at Murrayfield ahead of Scotland’s Six Nations clash with France, Calderwood had likewise said: “I’ve looked at the scientific evidence very carefully, and what’s emerging is that there’s actually very little impact on virus spread from mass gatherings, particularly if they are in the open air. This is not a risk to the Scottish population in hosting this match.” She is equally the incompetent medical officer who allowed Prince Charles and wife Camilla to jump the queue ahead of frontline workers and have virus tests they weren’t eligible for in Scotland, when they had travelled there against the rules to a second home.

[Calderwood herself was forced to resign her post after facing intense criticism for breaking her own rules to twice also visit her own second home during the coronavirus outbreak].

Here in England we have had another example of senior government figures simply ignoring of the rules when scientist Prof Neil Ferguson (the epidemiologist leader of the team at Imperial College London, whose advice prompted Boris Johnson to introduce the lockdown), who frequently appeared in the media to support the lockdown and had lectured the public on the need for strict social distancing in order to reduce the spread of coronavirus, had to resign and therefore step-back from his involvement in Sage [the Government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies], after himself flouting lockdown rules to meet his married lover for trysts on at least two occasions – he allowed the woman who had only just finished a two-week spell self-isolating after testing positive for coronavirus, to visit him at home during the lockdown and was exposed by The Telegraph newspaper. Moreover, he like other public health experts and senior government figures involved in supposedly leading the Country and the fight against the virus, had himself previously also tested positive for coronavirus (all a bit worrying, eh?)

packed in tight at the Cheltenham Festival 

It seemed to be an astounding controversial decision by the UK government to take the risk and allow this Cheltenham event to go ahead in light of the fact that it broke ALL the rules of lockdown, with attendees traveling long distances from far and wide, with some 60,000 to over 70,000 racegoers flocking daily to the Gloucestershire course [more than 250,000 punters are estimated to have visited over the four days of the Festival], amid clear evidence of TOTAL abandonment of SOCIAL DISTANCING rules, which have banned ALL public gatherings of anyone not from the same household, as masses of people were TIGHTLY PACKED TOGETHER in the enclosures, stands and bars. It brought people from all parts of the UK and Ireland together, mixed them up and sent them back home. People were in close proximity, shouting, whooping, hollering. If you had someone there transmitting the disease, there was a very great scope for others to become infected and take it home. There followed a huge spike in coronavirus hospital admissions after Cheltenham Festival

[Indeed, a report on lockdown suggests that “public events” account for 60 per cent of a viral reproduction number of one (R1) – the level at which the virus starts to spread again, while according to Imperial College data, opening schools, by contrast, would account for just 30 per cent of R1]

Confirmed deaths of patients with Covid-19 in Gloucestershire hospitals reach 185 as of Friday, May 1, 2020 and leaked data showed that as of April 3 CHELTENHAM itself had the highest number of coronavirus hospital admissions in the COUNTY. What is stark about the stats is just how badly Gloucestershire has been hit by the virus, far surpassing any other region in the South West, almost double the number of cases seen in Devon, the next worst hit county. It was absolutely ludicrous the festival was allowed to take place this year, don’t you think?

Moreover, the lack of community ‘testing and tracing’, had meant it would never be possible to know whether Cheltenham contributed to the UK spread of Covid-19, or the extent of that nor how far it travelled away

[A number of attendees have reported symptoms consistent with the virus and there have been a number of confirmed virus cases within Cheltenham village itself, with a Tesco worker testing positive for COVID-19. Amongst those who definitely caught virus after mixing with the crowds at the Festival were, member of the British royal family and in the line of succession to the Earldom of Macclesfield, Andrew Parker Bowles, comic and actor, the star of sitcom ‘Not Going Out’ Lee Mack and professional footballer for West Bromwich Albion Charlie Austin].

Moreover, the UK should have learned from other countries and gone into serious lockdown at least a couple of months ago, whence doubtless we could have avoided the massive scale of destruction the virus has delivered here. Even so, it has then been left to the likes of the English FA to take independent action and suspend all Premier League and EFL football games and stop the public attending football matches. While, with the connivance of the government, it might have been business as usual at Cheltenham last month, a host of other responsible sports have announced the cancellation of their big events, with the NBA ending the season early, Formula 1 calling off the Australian Grand Prix and the annual PGA ‘The Players Championship’ (TPC) tournament at Sawgrass scrapped.

Liverpool verses Atlético Madrid (space less)

Regarding football, little less than 2 months ago, coronavirus was beginning to grip Britain, and there were almost 600 cases, UK deaths were being counted and doctors in northern Italy were warning of the nightmare to come. Yet on 11 March, in the very same week as the Cheltenham Festival, a Champions League match (the second leg of the Champions League last-16 tie). did though take place on Merseyside, between Liverpool and Atlético Madrid. That was despite the statistic that Madrid emerged as one of Europe’s first hotspots for the spread of Covid-19 in early March, a fact that resulted in La Liga games swiftly being moved behind closed doors (indeed Atlético had been ordered to play matches at their own home ground behind closed doors) and then ultimately postponed. However, despite that action being taken, Atletico were allowed to travel to England to play against the reigning European champions

It was attended by 52,000 people, including 3,000 from Madrid, at a time when Spain was already in partial lockdown, gatherings of more than 1,000 people had been banned in Spain, and the UK had also introduced its own lockdown measures including social distancing, although the banning mass gatherings was not a UK government priority at the time, and only later did Johnson finally advise against large-scale events. The fact that the Madrid fans were UNABLE to attend matches in their home city yet could travel to a game in Liverpool was absurd, but nevertheless the Government and UEFA decided the game should go ahead. Following several deaths in their city which have been blamed on that football game, and anger over Atlético fans attending Anfield, Madrid officials are to investigate the potential Covid-19 link. Moreover, some here say it is scandalous if people had contracted the virus as a direct result of an event that shouldn’t have taken place. There remain fears that it had turbo-charged the spread of the killer disease, and indeed the stats would indicate that it is actually true, considering that Liverpool had only six confirmed coronavirus cases when the match took place, since which 246 people have died in Liverpool NHS hospitals from the disease. Indeed, back in mid-March there were just 12 confirmed cases of coronavirus on Merseyside as a whole at the time, but a month late by mid-April, there were nearly 3,000, with 448 deaths recorded in the region’s hospitals.

The number of coronavirus cases in Liverpool rose sharply after the match on 11 March and the 5-14 days virus pre-symptomatic/incubation period and other cCharts and maps are showing how coronavirus has spread across Greater Manchester in five weeks

Data usually lags a few days and figures for the yellow columns are likely to be revised upwards when NHS England issues further updatesThe number of coronavirus deaths in Manchester rose sharply after the derby match between Man City and Man Utd on 8 March and the following 5-14 days virus pre-symptomatic/incubation period. Exactly five weeks after the first confirmed Covid-19 death in the region (on the same date as the match), there have were some 505 deaths recorded by NHS England, and so a coronavirus patient died every 30 minutes in Greater Manchester hospitals as the pandemic’s deadly toll reached a terrifying new peak. At the same time North west coronavirus case hospital admissions themselves continued to rise

Up until mid-March 2020, the UK was supposed to be in a ‘containment’ phase before moving to a ‘delay’ phase of COVID-19, but what exactly did the government actually DO to enact containment and then delay. In a word virtually NOTHING [SO BOTH PHASES FAILED] and that is why the UK is instead suffering a massive coronavirus expansion and indeed has followed the same track as Italy’s disastrous coronavirus numbers and deaths escalation, and that’s hardly surprising because initially, Italy like the UK did little to stop the spread of coronavirus. Only after it registered more deaths than any other country outside China, and the scale of the crisis became clear, did Italy lock down first the northern region at the centre of the crisis and then the entire country – we in UK have still haven’t introduced any travel bans, applied airport fever screening or significantly locked down ANYTHING, have we? No, and that’s despite having the benefit of seeing the success of major lockdowns in other counties.

In a telling indictment, the Mayor of an Italian town that’s been in the midst of the pandemic, who personally had locked down his town very early on in the crisis, reported in a recent television programme on the severity of the virus and its devastating consequences locally. He disclosed that he had two daughters studying in England and that they were returning home because he said it was safer there in Italy, despite being in an epicentre, because the UK was utterly unsafe as it hadn’t done enough to contain the virus nor was doing enough to protect the population. Many of would understand where he is coming from, wouldn’t we?

All our government has done recently is to unconvincingly tell people (without adequate explanation, it has to be said) “stay at home to save the NHS” [a clever but meaningless phrase dreamt up no doubt by Dominic Cummings, the Prime Minister’s Chief of Staff and his chief adviser], but like in all other such matters, mixed messages has been transmitted by those in government about everyone self-isolating (when the Department of Health and Social Care ‘at that time’ said that people should not self-isolate unless they had a fever or a new continuous cough), staying at home, not going out at all, not working nor travelling anywhere,– why then were the members of the House of Lords [792 of the self-indulgent blighters] and 650 MPs from all over the UK still daily or weekly traveling to Westminster, regularly using London tube and public transport, with all of those MPs working in Parliament, hourly all crowding into the House of Commons chamber, filling lobbies, enjoying their members’ main bars and restaurants [which most shockingly have remained open (while those in our communities are shut)], and moreover failing to keep safe separation distances from others including thousands of staff and civil servants, and doubtless further spreading coronavirus far and wide everywhere, as evidenced when we had a number of MPs with symptoms self-isolating including Shadow Secretary of State for Education Angela Rayner, with the new Chancellor Rishi Sunak working from home as a precaution, Head of Public Health England Duncan Selbie with symptoms self-isolating, even the Chief Medical Officer Prof Whitty with symptoms self-isolating, and MP Kate Osborne, MP Lloyd Russell-Moyle together with Scottish Secretary Alister Jack, plus Health Minister Nadine Dorries, and Health Secretary Matt Hancock, as well as PM Boris Johnson himself (now hospitalised), actually testing positive for COVID-19 coronavirus, eh? (Johnson’s pregnant girlfriend ex-head of communications for Conservative Party headquarters Carrie Symonds, in addition to his Downing Street located chief advisor Dominic Cummings supposedly from 30 March at home ‘self-isolating’ after experiencing coronavirus SYMPTOMS – well it turns out though that he and his symptomatic wife while the PM was in hospital with coronavirus, DIDN’T STAY AT HOME but instead flitted-around for weeks and shattered the strict lockdown rules by NOT actually self-isolating, and not even for 7 days let alone 14 days, neither at home nor elsewhere, when as potential carriers of coronavirus, they then even further compounded that by reportedly TWICE escaping from their permanent residence in a highly infected lock-downed London to TWICE make a 250 mile car journey and hence potentially transfer the virus to the then minimally infected North East (Durham which since then has become the 5th worse area for infection) – though illegal somehow, unlike normal people in the public, he wasn’t fined by the police – to blatantly further flaunt the rules and with his sick wife to visit and stay with his over 70 year old vulnerable parents at their home in Durham, thereby risking THEIR lives, plus also visiting a local woods beauty spot, while additionally on his wife’s birthday, taking a further 30 mile daytrip out to the popular tourist destination of Teesdale market town Barnard Castle – so it would seem that Johnson’s personal previous disregard of lockdown regulations HIMSELF simply transfers to those most closely associated with him, while a weak Number 10 intolerably and repeatability defends and basically excuses the barefaced wilful lapses and the implausible explanations of those who should be setting an example, which thereby further erodes public trust in the government and its mixed messaging about dealing with the virus, eh?)

[Oh yes parliament HAD indeed subsequently BEEN PUT INTO shutdown on 25th March, and they all went home for a month, but that was NOTHING to do with something so important as coronavirus crippling the Country, was it? NO, it was simply put in recess for its standard Easter break HOLIDAY and they all tripped back some month ago – bizarre, or what?]

There are only two possible explanations for that whole dire situation of infections within the elite, aren’t there? Yep either those at the top ignored so themselves haven’t followed their own public advice diktat, or the advice itself is crap – but which is it, though?

[We do ‘know’ however that Boris some time ago before he was ill with the virus, together with other Ministers, ignored the rules and attended a Commons crowded PMQs on the Wednesday and that he, Hancock and Whitty, all with crucial coronavirus protection roles, nevertheless had also attended Cabinet on the Tuesday [the Cabinet Secretary ‘Mark Sedwill’ also joined Cabinet but as yet reports no symptoms], while other ministers responsibly just dialled-in INSTEAD. Johnson although he had symptoms also then led on the Thursday the ‘Clap for Carers’ event in Downing Street, without warning others there, like the Chancellor, of his symptoms condition – somewhat irresponsible for someone supposedly setting an example and leading the Country in the fight against the virus, eh? He also chaired the daily COVID-19 emergency committee meeting in his office on the Friday].

How can the public trust those in in charge including the Prime Minister, OR those supposedly public health EXPERTS generating medical advice for them, to look after US when patently they can’t even look after THEMSELVES in that respect?]

Because of government mixed messages’, we have seen that massive numbers of people, against the then government advice, had still been going to work in the UK [like say in the construction industry].

However, the most effective way of keeping companies solvent while controlling or reducing the numbers at work would have been to introduce a 3-Day-week, on the lines of that which was implemented for over 2 months back in 1974 by the Tories [in that case to reduce electricity consumption, and thus conserve coal stocks during the miners’ strike – commercial users of electricity were limited to three specified consecutive days’ consumption each week and prohibited from working longer hours on those days. Services deemed essential (e.g. hospitals, supermarkets and newspaper printing presses) were exempt].

In the current and more important life-threatening coronavirus situation, the equivalent 3-Day-week would mean that all companies and organisations, with essential exemptions of course, were limited to three specified consecutive days’ of work each week and prohibited from working longer hours on those days. That would at a stroke cut-off work opportunity by half or more and achieve what is sought, without resorting to personal persuasion that doesn’t work when there is conflicting pressure like say income

Furthermore, a much better and lest costly way of dealing with this coronavirus epidemic though would have been for the government to have generate sufficient quick and cheap facilities in the UK to test everybody and do so everyday, and then give them clearance certification to allow those who prove to be negative [say for two consecutive days] to go about their normal lives like going to work, socialising and attending events – then the economy and country would not have collapsed in the way it has and businesses would not have gone to the wall

As the current, swab tests used by Public Health England take up to 2 days to get a result in that time, suspected patients could be spreading germs to other people, couldn’t they?

Oh yes the Government had as of last month finally shut indefinitely the schools with resulting impending mayhem for the young of A-level and GCSE exams being cancelled, as the government made another sudden but too-late escalation in its efforts to curb the increasing spread of coronavirus, but it even immediately undermined that message BOTH by saying schools can now be used for ‘childcare’ instead of education by those parents who are deemed key workers [so THEY are ones who should ignore the public advice and still have gone to work, eh? But there is totally inadequate definition of those who are deemed to be key workers, hence even low-paid Macdonald staff believed they fell into that category (as part of the supply chain), no less?] AND surprisingly the government had failed to learn from other counties who had done school closures much earlier – their experience was that such an announcement of school closures resulted in an immediate public panic buying spree and hoarding of food, so did our government caution the population against doing it and shame them against it, or even warn UK grocery retailers of that serious impending problem and suggest avoidance of it by them rationing and limiting customer purchases to normal quantities (as they’re doing now) to avoid the shelves being cleared? NO OF COURSE NOT – they just let the disaster take place whereby a £1billion of food was snatched away from the shelves and hoarded in just three weeks, meaning afterwards nurses and medical staff coming off long shifts couldn’t then buy basic supplies of food for their meals, and that is despite manufacturers increasing production by 50 percent.

The government have made a massive mess of their attempts to educated the British public about coronavirus and lockdown, as their daily TV update, instead of being upbeat, encouraging and usefully informative about the virus and ways of dealing with it, or even identifying the low death rates for many age groups, has simply been a disheartening exposure of demoralizing data showing increasing failure and a continuing downward trend in the UK’s and World’s handing of the crisis – leaving the public more demoralised and ready to slit their wrists, rather than with developing a Blitz mentality that got us through the War , wouldn’t you say?

On top of that, in a shameful display of tribalism of the well-off with affluent lifestyles, Chancellor Rishi Sunak announced substantial State financial help for fulltime workers and the self-employed whose income or work opportunities had been hit by the pandemic. Well, one can judge that it was morally right and necessary to do so, but not at the massive overgenerous scale proposed which is most certainly OTT. The people covered by this handout have had many years of substantially higher income and more affluent lifestyle compared to the average worker and many of them will have accrued substantial assets, so why should the ordinary taxpayer now be called upon to allow them to simply continue in an affluent style compared to the rest of society at public expense, do you think? Any additional payments/grants surely should have been means tested or at least only been at the same type of level of unemployment benefit [circa £300/month not the £2,500 or £5,000 proposed].

Then into the bargain all businesses, however rich and capable of taking some of the financial pain, are being allowed to furlough staff (temporary layoff from work – inflexibly was initially ‘full-time’) and the State simply picks-up the wages tab, with the taxpayer facing a £60BILLION hit [half of UK companies are seeking to furlough staff over coronavirus, and the Treasury itself has estimated that about 3m people, or 10 per cent of the private sector workforce, will be furloughed, so their employers will take advantage of the government job retention scheme [it has to be said, without facing any restriction (like say a maximum 50 percentage of the workforce that can be so furloughed, or say a £50,000 cap on the total of furloughed salaries or employer must pay the other 20%), or some penalty (like say loss of tax relief on Corporation tax), or some disincentive (like say a special furloughed tax of 20% of total avoided wages), otherwise it is a no-brainer for firms just to furlough everybody, isn’t it?].

The fact is that companies should exhaust all financial revenues before turning to the taxpayer, but that’s not happening, is it? No and moreover despite the scheme’s objectives of preventing avoidable unemployment some employers are bucking the traces and simply sacking staff. The furlough arrangements SHOULD have been accompanied by statuary REDUNDANCY obligations place on employers who release staff (say perhaps a minimum of 6 months redundancy pay)

Moreover, the taxpaying public would have expected those individuals of great personal wealth should use their own resources at this time of crisis, whereas at least 20 billionaires are amongst 63 of the County’s richest people to pocket public funding to pay their companies’ workers under ‘mad as a hatter’ Rishi Sunak’s government’s furlough scheme.

So, we have second in the rich list (and worth £16billion) Sri and Gopi Hinduja brothers furloughed360 staff of bus & coach building company Optare, founded 1985, a leading British manufacturer of urban buses with a modern assembly facility near Leeds, Yorkshire, and part of Ashok Leyland, one of the top 4 global bus producers, and part of the Hinduja Group (Optare 2016/17 revenue £35million, financial results for the year showed a net loss of £14.7m compared to a loss of £15.7m in the previous period, largely due to a drop in UK volume, INVESTMENT IN EXPORTS and EV vehicle DEVELOPMENT. The key highlights for the period end are that Optare entered 2018/19 with significantly LOWER level of DEBTS); Jim Ratcliffe fifth in the rich list (and worth over £12billion) as co-owner of The Pig hotel chain of seven hotels (2017 Turnover at The Pig’s parent company ‘Home Grown Hotels’ reached £21m as occupancy at The Pig rose to 93%) which has furloughed most of its staff, while his other company chemical giant Incos hasn’t done so YET; property tycoons brothers worth £16billion) David and Simon Reuben furloughed some 750 business staff; music and media baron worth £16billion Leonard Blavatnik also used furlough ; Philip Green worth nearly £1billion furloughed 14,500 (30%) of his Arcadia retail staff; Mike Ashley worth nearly £2billion Frasers Group has put most of its 18,000 employees on furlough; while others like Victoria Beckham (worth £370million) and Spurs owners Joe Lewis (worth 4billion) and Daniel Levy (worth £329million) ditched using the scheme but only did so following public backlash

Regarding use of furlough, THEN, we have ALSO the glaring RIP-OFF example of CP Plus the NHS car park firm that plans to furlough staff (so we pick-up the cost of part funding the company’s £5.8m wages bill) as well as deferring tens of thousand of pounds of due VAT payments, when NOT ONLY has it just declared an annual pre-tax profit of £4.5m on £20m of turnover, BUT ALSO the two owners have just taken £16m out of the business, while nevertheless the taxpayer bales-out their company and is hit hard for such unwarranted emergency coronavirus substantial funding – Rishi Sunak needs to put his brain into gear and sort-out this ‘self-created’ mess, don’t you think?

Companies which are tax avoiders, who make hugh profits but hide them in tax havens so don’t pay into the exchequer what they should in fair share, aren’t excluded so are nevertheless extensively using the furlough, bailout, and state aid schemes [you see, international corporations use complex financial structures to move their income and costs around the world to cut their tax bill liabilities – so 20 of Britain’s BIGGEST companies operate more the a thousand subsidiaries in off-shore tax havens and/or have overseas head offices]. Other countries like France, Denmark, and Poland deny state aid to such firms, and so should Britain unless they commit to ditching their tax havens to returning to UK for tax purposes and so pay here a proper and fair tax share

As well, those companies owned by wealthy Tory donors, as you’d expect, have also been allowed to get their snouts in the government’s state aid cash trough with its over-generous, inadequate and poorly formulated coronavirus compensation scheme

So we have the likes of Staffordshire-based construction equipment and agricultural machinery firm JCB [a 75 year old business with a profitability of £447million and a record annual turnover of £4.1BILLION last year], owned by Lord Bamford [family wealth £4BILLION (given a peerage 7 years ago who has pledged £10million to the Conservatives), furloughing MOST of its 6,500 staff

Or the UK’s No. 1 Homewares retailer with ‘169 superstores’, ‘three high street store’s and ‘an online website’, the giant British furniture maker, homewares and furnishings retailer, firm Dunelm [founded in 1979 but enhanced in 2016 with the acquisition of the Worldstores Group (comprising the Worldstores, Achica and Kiddicare retail brands) that in summer 2018 delivered the impressive trading results of £140million profit with a turnover of over £1BILLION, and said then to be well positioned for growth, and then as sales soared it made another £85million profit last year]; Deputy Chairman Will Adderley last year arranged through his private investment firm, a ½ million donation to the Conservatives. However, ‘Dunelm’ is now furloughing the VAST MAJORITY of its 10,000 staff, despite last month actually reopening its online business after making coronavirus safety changes.

In addition, we have the example of German discount chain B&M [2019 a massive pre-tax profit of £96 million – but a drop due to a “disappointing” first half performance of its business in Germany] that briefly furloughed staff and closed 49 of its 660 stores; Tory donor Simon Arora and his two brothers have made about £1million from the company including £230million by selling shares

The government’s coronavirus scheme, which also includes a three-month business rates holiday, covers four-fifths of a worker’s wages up to £2,500 a month, which means those earning at least a very sizable £30,000/year salary (well more than average income).

Within the bailout of the business GIANTS, we have the likes of Marriott, the world’s largest hotel company, which expects to furlough tens of thousands of employees’, as well as major outfits like British Airways [a large majority of employees, more than half of its 45,000 workers (30,000 cabin crew and ground staff furloughed for the next two months, though making some 12,000 redundant was dropped), despite it making a whopping £1.6 BILLION PROFIT last year], Virgin Atlantic, EasyJet, Nissan, Arcadia and Ovo energy (the second largest UK supplier after BG, with 5 million retail customers, 5 million employees and a turnover of some 1,000 million pounds) – all planning to furlough workers and joining the likes of Greggs, Costa, McDonald’s and Primark, so experts predict that as many as 6.1million private sector employees (at least double the Treasury figure) could be furloughed].

It is unclear why AIRLINES that ought to be strong and resilient enough, find themselves in such financial peril that they require hugh UK government bailouts. Although they’ve avoided paying their fair share of taxes and have dodged responsibility for their climate-wrecking emissions, they now want to get a free ride from this virus crisis, when for example billionaire entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson (who founded Virgin Atlantic in 1984 and retains a 51% stake), hasn’t paid the exchequer ANY UK personal income tax for 14 years since moving to the tax-free British Virgin Islands, , but he’s as well as furloughing 8,000 Virgin staff is also pleading for UK government support and asking for a £500 million taxpayer bailout for his mammoth airline comprising Virgin Atlantic, Virgin Holidays and Cargo [although, for 2018 it reported a pre-tax loss of £26.1 million before tax and exceptional items following-on from a £49m loss in 2017, it nevertheless reported being in a strong cash position, while its overall revenue was a hugh £150m, and passenger numbers had grown to 5.4 million, with results displaying positive growth in passenger unit revenue (passenger revenue per available seat kilometre or PRASK) – that performance had been impacted by the weakness of GBP versus USD, economic uncertainty and the continued shortage of the engines used on Boeing 787 aircraft, but nevertheless an overall result that was said to put the company in a strong position to realise its plan to revive growth and return to profitability. [Its focus is on delivering safe, industry leading service with unrivalled customer experience, and it is number one in IATA customer satisfaction ranking for transatlantic flights and operating its most punctual flying schedule between the US and London Heathrow since 1997]. However, while in the process of applying for emergency loans from the government, it now reports in a shock and devastating announcement that it is to cut more than 3,000 jobs in the UK and plans to end its operation at Gatwick airport where it is the ninth-largest airline. Virgin doubtless will be challenging very hard to justify its actions with 30% of jobs being lost, and whether or not it will be allowed to keep its slots at Gatwick as it intends for a potential return, is a moot point, surely?

Meanwhile, budget airline EasyJet [its latest revenue was £6.39 BILLION with a declared pre-tax profit of £430 million (following on from £445 million for fiscal 2018) and while refusing to cancel a £170 million pay-out made to shareholders just weeks ago, it is nevertheless set to receive £600 million in cheap government loans].

In stark contrast, the low-cost carrier Ryanair, Europe’s largest airline, insists it will hit its full-year profit forecasts [so pre-tax profits of between £808million and £940million for this year] despite a collapse in global air travel, though it does not expect passenger demand to recover for at least two years. However, it plans to axe 3,000 jobs (15% of its workforce as the minimum needed just to survive the next 12 months, mainly pilot and cabin crew jobs), as well as also urging some staff to take unpaid leave, and implementing pay cuts of up to 20pc, while planning the closure of a number of aircraft bases across Europe. Rather than furloughing staff, it has apparently chosen to get rid of some of the Prestwick Aircraft Maintenance Ltd (PAML) workers, who service Ryanair planes, (allegedly sacked after they raised their grievances about their pay being halved during the coronavirus lockdown).

Moreover, the airlines dipping-in, all want their money with no-strings-attached, so no promises to clean up their businesses or protect the climate, and no commitments to put their employees before shareholders and bonuses, eh?

Even Chancellor Rishi Sunak, it has to be said without admitting culpability, now admits that the cost of furlough scheme and his other aid was “clearly not a sustainable situation” as he said that Britain must get back to work. In reality more than half of Britain’s adult population (is now being bankrolled by the state amid warnings from the Chancellor that the furlough scheme could soon cost as much as the NHS. Analysis of official figures shows that 27 million people, about 53 per cent out of an adult population of just over 52 million, are now being funded by the Government amid growing concern over the devastating toll to the economy wrought by the coronavirus pandemic. The figure includes people being paid through the furlough scheme and those now claiming benefits after being made unemployed because of the virus. The remainder are public sector workers and pensioners.

Latest official released figures showed 6.3 million people in the UK – almost a quarter of all PAYE employees – have now been put on furlough by their employers at a cost of £8 billion in the first month (while the NHS budget is only slightly more at approximately £11 billion a month). It is one thing to provide welfare help to those workers in most need but it is neither ‘practical’ and nor ‘affordable’ for the State to pay people NOT to work, as is happening now, is it?


Perhaps though, it can AND SHOULD BE ALL BE ultimately paid for by scrapping the irrelevant and Country’s bankrupting Trident replacement programme, as well as the crippling ‘vanity project’ of the inevitably failing HS2 venture, wouldn’t you say? [note furthermore that it has just come to light that NOT ONLY has the HS2 programme gone badly off course with the estimated cost up now to £86billion (significantly more than the original budget of £55.7billion) both at 2015 prices, with further cost increases likely, BUT twice (last May and in October2018), the Department for Transport (DfT) Permanent Secretary Bernadette Kelly appeared and personally misled parliament about the state of play on delivery timeline and budget (ie lied – it would appear under the coercion of political ministers?) and withheld the information that the programme was then in significant difficulty, and consequently the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) cannot be convinced now that the Department and HS2 ltd have the skills and capability needed to deliver it – the public wont and cannot trust the official cost of HS2 (and never could, eh?)


  • The number of restrictions around the World are multiplying rapidly and international travel is becoming very limited as air routes close, land borders close and new restrictions are put in place that prevent flights from leaving.Effective on 17 March for an initial period of 30 days, the Foreign Office (FCO) advised UK nationals against all but essential international travel. Border closures and other travel restrictions are increasing globally.Within the UK, the government is calling on people to avoid travelling at all unless essential and staying at home remaining in their primary residence to avoid putting additional pressure on communities and services that may be already at riskAs of 23 March, the FCO is advising UK nationals who are travelling abroad to return home immediately if commercial flights are still available. FCO also advises UK nationals against all non-essential travel for 30 days and if UK nationals are usually based in the UK, the FCO advises returning if possible, but if you are a permanent resident overseas, you should stay and follow the advice of the local authorities in the country you live inRESTRICTIONS: Countries that have travel restrictions in place that may affect UK nationals (who do not have residencies in other countries).
  • The Gulf countries (Kuwait, Oman, Saudi Arabia, UAE, Qatar and Bahrain) have introduced range of measures like travel bans, stepping up screening measures at important entry points, and rescheduling and in some cases cancelling significant sports and cultural events. aimed at curbing the spread of coronavirus. Ban on entry to UK travellers. Some flights and visa-on-arrival schemes suspended. (Need to check with travel providers if transit is permitted before travelling). UAE inbound and outbound flights will stop from midnight (if you’re travelling in the UAE, continue to contact your airline or tour operator regarding any possible return flights: Bahrain; suspension of visa-on-arrival scheme. Self-quarantine for 14 days: ).
  • US has imposed additional travel restrictions regarding Iran, Italy and S Korea and now a ban on entry to UK travellers. Border with Canada closed to non-essential travel from 20 March. Some flights suspended. UK travellers that wish to leave are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible, to ensure travel plans can be met.
  • Italy has locked down much of the Country’s North over the Coronavirus – the restrictions affect Milan and the regions that serve as Italy’s economic engine, and are the most sweeping measures outside China
  • Europe supposedly remains open although the EU has proposed that all non-essential travel should be suspended to the European Union for a month which would affect travel from outside the EU, [the UK would be exempt] but the countries, and airports, with restrictions and preventive measures in place is increasing [Albania and Slovenia; all flights suspended: France; some flights suspended.UK nationals can still drive through France to return to the UK. Cross-Channel train and ferry services reduced. Restrictions on non-essential movement from 17 March for 15 days (ie food shopping, medical care, exercise of up to 20 minutes running or walking). Cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours and public transport limited: Austria; no direct flights between Austria and the UK, or direct air or rail connections from Austria to Italy, France, Spain or Switzerland. Travellers coming from Italy by road will be stopped at the border and must present a health certificate stating that they are not affected by coronavirus. Ski resorts closed on 15 March in Tirol, Salzburg and Vorarlberg: Greece; self-quarantine for 14 days. Cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours and public transport limited; health screenings on arrival likely. Flights from and to UK Italy, Spain and Turkey are suspended: Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Slovakia and Ukraine; ban on entry to UK travellers (check with airlines and transport providers if transit is permitted before travelling). UK travellers are advised to consider leaving these countries as soon as possible, as onward travel could become more difficult. Flight schedules are reduced, some land/sea borders closed and some non-essential movement restricted: Bosnia-Herzegovina; ban on entry to UK travellers. Flights with UK suspended. All borders are closed: Croatia; ban on entry to UK travellers. Borders closed form 19 March for 30 days: Cyprus; ban on entry to UK travellers. Flights suspended until 4 April at least: Denmark; ban on entry to UK travellers. Some flights suspended. Flights suspended from Greenland from 21 March to at least 4 April. Flights to Faroe Islands severely reduced. Borders with Sweden closed to travellers from 14 March: Andorra, Monaco and the Netherlands; cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours; public transport limited; health screenings on arrival likely. Some flights suspended: Azerbaijan; mandatory quarantine for 14 days. E-visas suspended. Flight schedules reduced. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible, as onward travel could become more difficult: Belgium; flights from outside the EU are suspended. Transit through Belgium requires proof of residence and onward travel. Restrictions on non-essential movement (ie except food shopping, medical care). Cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours; public transport limited. Some flights suspended: Ireland; self-quarantine for 14 days. Cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours and public transport limited; health screenings on arrival likely: Isle of Man; self-quarantine for 14 days: Lithuania; Ban on entry and transit to UK travellers. Countrywide quarantine until 14 April. All commercial flights suspended until further notice. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible: Luxembourg; all passenger flights suspended from 23 March. Restrictions on non-essential movement (ie except food shopping, medical care). Cultural and sporting activities are prohibited; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars are closed; shops likely to be open at limited hours; public transport limited: Malta travellers in Malta are advised by the Maltese government to leave as soon as possible: Moldova; no direct flights to the rest of Europe. Ban on entry to travellers who have been in China, Hong Kong, Iran, Italy, Japan, Macao, South Korea or Taiwan in the 14 days before arrival: Montenegro; Ban on entry to travellers who have recently been in Japan, France, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Austria, Italy, Spain, South Korea, Iran and Hubei province of China. Self-quarantine for 14 days for travellers who have recently been in Japan, France, Germany, Switzerland, Denmark, Slovenia or Austria: Portugal; land border restrictions with Spain until 15 April (ie cross-border commuters and deliveries only). However, UK nationals can still drive through Spain and France to return to the UK. Flights from outside the EU suspended (not including UK, US, Canada, Venezuela, South Africa and Portuguese-speaking countries). Self-quarantine for 14 days for anyone arriving in The Algarve (Faro), the north (Viana do Castelo, Braga, Vila Real, Bragança, Porto, Aveiro, Viseu), the Azores, Madeira and Porto Santo. All campsites closed. Restrictions to non-essential movement are likely to be imposed soon: Romania; ban on entry to UK travellers. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible. Flights, bus, and rail routes from Italy suspended. Large gatherings restricted and some public transport suspended: Slovakia; ban on entry to UK travellers. Commercial charter company Charter Advisory may offer flights to London in the coming days. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving these countries as soon as possible, as onward travel could become more difficult. Flight schedules are reduced, some land/sea borders closed and some non-essential movement restricted: Spain; ban on entry to UK travellers. UK nationals can still drive through Spain to return to the UK. All borders closed for entry from 23 March for 30 days. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible. Hotels and short-stay accommodation must close by Tuesday 24 March (measures do not apply to long-term accommodation, such as long-stay campsites, provided travellers can cater for themselves and do not rely on communal facilities, which will be closed). Some flights suspended. Land-border restrictions (ie cross-border commuters and deliveries only). Restrictions on non-essential movement (ie except food shopping, medical care): Sweden; ban on entry to UK travellers. All Scandinavian Airlines flights suspended. Other travel options are limited: Switzerland; ban on entry to UK travellers. Land border restrictions (ie no non-residents, and cross-border commuters and deliveries only) and some flights restricted (residents only). Restrictions on non-essential movement (ie food shopping, medical care, exercise, those that can’t work from home only). Cultural and sporting activities prohibited; ski resorts closed; large gatherings restricted; restaurants and bars closed; grocery shops likely to be open at limited hours and public transport limited: Turkey; ban on entry to UK travellers. Direct flights to the UK suspended from 17 March. Aeroflot is scheduling some flights to London via Moscow. Land borders closed. Travellers who test positive on arrival will be quarantined in a government facility for 14 days, and negative test results in 14 days self-quarantine. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible, as onward travel could become more difficult: ] – anyone who has recently travelled to or transited through China have complete ban on entry to Australia, Bahamas, many Caribbean islands, Guatemala, Indonesia, Madagascar, Maldives, New Zealand, the Philippines, Singapore, USA and Vietnam, among others; anyone who has visited Italy recently complete ban on entry to Cook Islands, Fiji, India, Israel, Jordan, Lebanon, Mauritius, Mongolia, St Lucia, Seychelles and Turkey, among others. (All of these countries also have a ban on entry to anyone who has visited China); Passengers travelling from the UK recently the locations with a ban on people coming from the UK are the Federated States of Micronesia in the Pacific (the islands of Yap, Chuuk, Pohnpei and Kosrae), the Comoro Islands near Mozambique – both of which have a ban on travellers from all countries with confirmed cases of coronavirus – and the Pacific island of Kiribati. Those coming from the UK will also face immediate quarantine in the Solomon Islands. North Korea has banned all tourists from entering the country; Poland requires anyone travelling from China, Hong Kong, Italy, Korea or Macao to fill in a health declaration form; some of the world’s largest and busiest international airports have announced preventive safety measures. Prague has designated separate gates for all passengers arriving from Italy or China. People travelling from those countries also face screening at Bratislava airport in Slovakia. Similar procedures are currently in place in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia, Croatia, Moldova, Bulgaria, Albania and Turkey; UK, airports are acting on the advice of Public Health England (PHE) and have introduced advanced monitoring at airports with direct flights from China. There are also health experts at Heathrow ready to support anyone arriving from China who feels unwell; The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) in the US has increased screenings at 20 airports, including travellers having their temperature taken and filling out a questionnaire. Anyone with symptoms, such as fever, cough or difficulty breathing has to undergo an additional health assessment. Passengers arriving in the UAE, India, Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore and South Korea will also face screenings, with each country varying in terms of flight origin
  • In Asia: Armenia, Bhutan, Israel, Kuwait, Macao, Maldives, Mongolia, Oman, Saudi Arabia and Turkmenistan; ban on entry to UK travellers. Some flights and visa-on-arrival schemes suspended. [Check with travel providers if transit is permitted before travelling]:
  • In Western Pacific: Brunei; ban on entry to UK travellers. Royal Brunei Airlines has suspended direct flight from Brunei to London – currently it is the only airline flying from Brunei, with twice-weekly flights to Hong Kong, Manila, Melbourne, and Singapore:
  • In South-East Asia: Bangladesh; suspension of visa-on-arrival scheme. Self-quarantine for 14 days. All travellers must present a health certificate within three days stating that they are not affected by coronavirus. Some flights suspended. Ban on entry to travellers who have recently been in Europe (not including UK): India; ban on entry to all travellers from the UK, EU, and Turkey from 18 March. Flights suspended until 14 April. Non-essential movement severely restricted. Commercial flights suspended until 14 April. All visas and e-visas invalid until 15 April: Myanmar; UK travellers must present a health certificate stating that they are not affected by coronavirus, or self-quarantine for 14 days. UK travellers are advised to leave as soon as possible. Some flights suspended. Transit permitted through Thailand: Nepal; suspension of visa-on-arrival scheme. All land borders closed. All mountaineering expeditions for spring 2020 have been suspended. All travellers require a health certificate stating that they do not have coronavirus: Sri Lanka; no new visas being issued, but those currently in the country can extend visas until 12 April. Airports closed until 31 March. National curfew in place – some areas lifting this curfew on 23 or 24 March and then imposing it again:
  • In Western Pacific: Cambodia; ban on entry to travellers who have recently been in France, Germany, Iran, Italy, Spain or the US: Hong Kong; ban on entry and transit to UK travellers. Some flights suspended: Indonesia; ban on entry to travellers who have been in the UK, Iran, Italy, Spain, France, Germany and Switzerland in the 14 days before entry. All visas suspended until 20 April initially. Flights severely disrupted and transit options limited. Indonesia; ban on entry to travellers who have been in the UK, Iran, Italy, Spain, France, Germany and Switzerland in the 14 days before entry. All visas suspended until 20 April initially. Flights severely disrupted and transit options limited: Japan; visa on arrival suspended until the end of April initially. Ban on entry to travellers who have been in China, Iran or Italy in the 14 days before arrival. Restrictions on non-essential movement in Tokyo 28 and 29 March: Laos; borders closed with Thailand. Thai Airlines and Thai Smile have suspended flights between Vientiane and Bangkok. UK travellers are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible, as onward travel could become more difficult: Malaysia; ban on entry to UK travellers. Transit permitted through Kuala Lumpur airport, but not between terminals, so travellers should confirm before travelling. Some flights suspended: Philippines; ban on entry to all UK travellers. Public transportation suspended, limited flights until 13 April: Singapore; ban on entry and transit. UK travellers that wish to leave are advised to consider leaving as soon as possible. Transit not currently permitted: Taiwan; ban on entry to UK travellers until 7 April. Some flights suspended:
  • In Eastern Mediterranean: Jordan; no commercial flights in or out of Jordan, and all land and sea borders closed. Restrictions on large gatherings and non-essential movement (ie except food shopping, medical care): Lebanon; all borders closed and flights suspended until 12 April. Restrictions on non-essential movement (ie except food shopping, medical care) and violators could face imprisonment; public and private gatherings banned; two people per car only; public transport suspended: Pakistan; most flights suspended until 4 April. Qatar Airways is planning operating daily flights from Islamabad from 25 March until 3 April, and other airlines may be planning limited services in the next few days. Some borders closed. Large gatherings prohibited. Travellers must present a health certificate stating that they are not affected by coronavirus, issued in the 24 hours prior to arrival: Qatar; ban on entry to UK travellers. Some flights suspended. Transit currently permitted:
  •  NOTE: In practice, virus travel bans and travel restrictions are inevitable but prove ‘ineffective’ because 1. they are imposed too late or 2. people circumvent them]

Inexplicably, in an dereliction of national duty and care, the UK government abandoned and failed to urgently repatriate by air more than 70 British nationals trapped onboard for 2 weeks on the American run Diamond Princess cruise ship, which had been held in ‘quarantined flawed’ conditions that turned it into a disease incubator, off the coast of Japan in the port of Yokohama near Tokyo since February 3, when basic decease control blunders meant that coronavirus spread like wildfire [over 700 cases/12 deaths] – mistakes like, so many people being kept herded together in one place, positive tested crew sharing rooms, toilets and dining spaces, the virus positive ship’s ‘quarantine officer’ going door to door checking on passengers, whence the dire consequence of all that far-off incompetence together with our government’s crass abandonment of our citizens, resulted more than a week later there in a Japan hospital of the first British coronavirus death (a 80 year old man) who caught the virus on the stricken ship – some would say that PM Boris Johnson and Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab already have blood on their hands, eh?

When the government finally got their finger out some month or more ago, much later than other counties, and rescued our citizens, those 30 repatriated [who all tested negative to having Covid-19 before they flew home] faced another 14-day quarantine at accommodation at Arrowe Park on the Wirral upon arrival in the UK (and were subsequently discharged after being given the all-clear), while the four cruise ship passengers (who were not on the same flight) as they had previously tested positive for coronavirus, were transferred to specialist NHS infection centres

Months ago, the first person to die of coronavirus in the UK occurred but that was only announced almost one week later and indeed five were already dead by the time UK reported the first coronavirus death (a woman in her 70s with underlying health conditions who it was thought contracted the virus in the UK but had not been in contact with any other known cases) – most disturbingly her test results only came back only after she had died [as said, currently swab tests used by Public Health England take 24 to 48 hours to be read by a specialist in a lab. So much for Boris’ assurances that the NHS could cope, eh?

Why didn’t our British government ensure, as others did for theirs, that the Country had adequate testing facilities to test everyone needing it and to have a short time period for results, so that the disease could be best controlled here – those at risk and even our front line NHS and care staff couldn’t be tested due to lack of facilities

Coronavirus testing just hasn’t been available to those who need it most in the UK – like if say you live in Norfolk and had recently returned home from a previously coronavirus quarantined cruise ship but then developed symptoms, they wouldn’t give you a test, but heir to the throne Prince Charles (also titled Duke of Rothesay) while suffering coronavirus symptoms and his current wife Camilla, with second/holiday homes at Norfolk’s Sandringham and Scotland’s Balmoral, were allowed to travel inessentially to Scotland and relocate there, to sit out the coronavirus pandemic, despite the government already having issued instructions against non-essential travel and contact, and then they jumped the queue there for NHS testing ahead of frontline medical and social care workers (like a frontline clinician at NHS Grampian. who was isolating because she had been displaying symptoms – meaning as a clinician was unable to go to work, but didn’t know whether she actually had coronavirus because she had not been able to have a test, plus other frontline medical, nursing and other key worker staff, also then at home who were unable to access testing – they had a situation where staff were at home for 14 days in isolation when they may have been negative, and these were people who needed to get tested so that if they were negative, could all get back to the front line where they were required). How comes the Royals were both eligible for a test from NHS Grampian when both were still in good health but he displaying just mild symptoms and Camilla, being asymptomatic (moreover, Grampian went out to Balmoral to actually carry out the two tests), while NHS Scotland website states that “generally” people are only tested if they have “a serious illness that requires admission to hospital”], and Charles having as tested positive is then allowed to self-isolate at a second home in Scotland [when the rest of us are told by government that we must stay at home and only make essential trips and that essential travel does not include visits to second homes, campsites, caravan parks or similar, whether for isolation purposes or holidays]. What kind of message does that send out to the British public about the restriction advice they themselves are being instructed to follow when, with the blessing of Scotland’s chief medical officer Catherine Calderwood, the monarchy, doesn’t have to, do you think? It hardly encourages a general public buy-in to the government’s quarantine rules, does it? That kind of selfishness and arrogance coming on top of that shown by Prince Andrew, Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan, puts the future of the British monarchy in jeopardy, surely?

The second UK reported death in early March, was of a Caribbean cruise ship passenger, man in his 80s who had underlying health conditions, but family say the hospital was ‘too slow’ to isolate him – apparently work is underway to trace people who the man was in contact with before he died (not very encouraging news or a sign that the government had got a grip then, is it?

Later, a man in his 60s died, making him the reported third person to die in the UK after contracting the virus. He had underlying health conditions and had recently returned from Italy

[There were 78 Britons on the Diamond Princess ship, 32 of whom were later airlifted home while four were taken to hospital in Japan where one died]

In March, a second cruise ship Grand Princess, on the trip of a lifetime 15-night vacation to Hawaii, with 3533 people on board (2422 passengers and 1111 crew members), of which more than 140 were Britons, needing to be tested for COVID-19 (amid America’s woeful lack of test kits, which had to be flown in by helicopter), so was ‘quarantined held’ off San Francisco US with 21 people including 19 crew members initially testing positive using the available test kits [after docking at port the passengers disembarked, with more than 3,000 people on board quarantined, with passengers at land facilities and the crew on board, it was later reported that, of the 1,103 passengers who elected to be tested, 103 tested positive, 699 tested negative, and the remaining results were pending (no subsequent test results though have been made public)]

A virus is a small infectious agent that replicates only inside the living cells of an organism. Viruses can infect all types of life forms, from animals and plants to microorganisms, including bacteria and archaea

Virus is a biological agent that reproduces inside the cells of living hosts. When infected by a virus, a host cell is forced to produce thousands of identical copies of the original virus at an extraordinary rate. Unlike most living things, viruses do not have cells that divide; new viruses are assembled in the infected host cell. But unlike still simpler infectious agents, viruses contain genes, which gives them the ability to mutate and evolve. Over 5,000 species of viruses have been discovered

Viruses seem to be more than more than just simple, inert bundles of genetic material, but unlike bacteria, viruses are NOT alive [though are considered by some to be a ‘life form’], because they do carry genetic material, reproduce, and evolve through natural selection, but they lack key characteristics (such as cell structure) that are generally considered necessary to count as ‘life’. Their complete reliability on a host for all their vital processes has led some scientists to deem viruses as ‘non-living’

While every living organism wants to live and reproduce and it will because it has the will to find a way to life, viruses are not considered ‘live’, so the most difficult thing to understand is just why viruses want to make us ill and replicate themselves in the first place, isn’t it?

Well, the answer might be difficult to get one’s head round, because we are told that a virus does not ‘want’ anything, but is merely a piece of molecular machinery that is passive until it comes into contact with a susceptible cell (a cell having the right receptor molecules to attach to the virus) and its action is simply part of the laws of physics and chemistry [analogous to water freezing when the temperature drops or water forming six-sided shapes when it crystallizes]

However, your cells resist being taken over by viruses, and their defence is by alerting the immune system, which responds by raising body temperature (viruses are damaged by that, as their replication mechanisms work better at lower temperatures), and creating inflammation to destroy viral particles and infected cells. Your body also expels viral particles through any convenient orifice, which helps it spread to new hosts, while making it less likely to survive where it is. It’s usually this interaction between the immune system, the virus, and infected tissues that creates the symptoms of viral infection, which we experience as being sick. Indeed, the faster a virus replicates, the sooner it will attract the wrath of the immune system and lose its current host. Some viruses, like the common cold, are easy-come-easy-go – infecting specifically the upper respiratory tract, where you can easily be coughed and sneezed out, and reproduce quickly there.

If the virus enters a permissive cell (able to support viral replication) and it is not destroyed by the immune defences, it will be replicated by the cellular machinery. Viruses that fail to replicate become extinct, and that actually happens quite often, as viruses don’t have as many replication safeguards as humans and so many of them simply come out wrong, unable to replicate.

In order to infect new hosts, a virus has to create numerous copies. To create copies, it has to insert itself into your cells and co-opt their machinery for itself. Then those copies have to get out of the cells which created them, which usually means destroying the cells, which means you need to make more cells. This can sometimes damage your organs. But in most cases, sickness isn’t actually a direct result of cells being destroyed by viruses.

The origins of viruses are unclear: some may have evolved from plasmids—pieces of DNA that can move between cells—while others may have evolved from bacteria. A virus consists of two or three parts: genes, made from either DNA or RNA, long molecules that carry genetic information; a protein coat that protects the genes; and in some viruses, an envelope of fat that surrounds the protein coat and is used, in combination with specific receptors, to enter a new host cell. Viruses vary in shape from the simple helical and icosahedral to more complex structures. Viruses range in size from 20 to 300 nanometres; it would take 33,000 to 500,000 of them, side by side, to stretch to 1 centimetre (0.39 in).

Well, coronavirus COVID-19 itself is a flu like respiratory illness but it is much different from that as it comes with complications that include particularly pneumonia and acute respiratory distress syndrome, so those most at risk of serious illness and death are the elderly and vulnerable with an underlying medical condition, aren’t they? The young and fit are at much lower risk, as apparently are women, but nevertheless still serious risk. The virus causes death due to respiratory failure or organ failure

It is called ‘corona’ as its photograph or image taken using an electron microscope is likened to a crown, and is similar to the rarefied gaseous envelope of the sun, the outermost part of the Sun’s atmosphere, and other stars [the sun’s corona is normally visible only during a total solar eclipse, when it is seen as an irregularly shaped pearly glow surrounding the darkened disc of the moon]

[Coronavirus has evolved into two major lineages, the older ‘S-type’ appears to be milder and less infectious, while the ‘L-type’ which emerged later, appears to be far more aggressive, spreads quickly and currently accounts for around 70 per cent of cases, and it is possible to be infected with both]

This coronavirus disease was caused by SARS-CoV-2, and was first identified in Wuhan, Hubei, China. The virus primarily spreads between people in a similar way to influenza, via respiratory droplets produced during coughing or sneezing, with the time between exposure and symptoms, including fever, cough, and shortness of breath, onset being typically five days, but ranging from two to fourteen days

[While coronavirus is believed to be spread mainly by inhaling droplets released when an infected person coughs or sneezes, these droplets can also land on surfaces, so a healthy person can then unknowingly touch those surfaces and the virus moves on to wherever and whatever the person touches next. Also, although more research is needed to fully determine the facts, it is believed to survive different times on different surfaces and it is said that coronavirus typically isn’t suited to surfaces that have a lot of holes or microscopic little grooves, nooks or crannies like paper and cardboard which are very porous, so it survives better on surfaces that are very smooth

Experts advise that the risk of consumers getting infected from touching even smooth hard materials surfaces, like plastic and steel is still low,

Not all the available data proves to be consistent but as a rough guide the information seems to be that survival times for the virus are:

Aerosol form 3 hours – but its ability to infect drops sharply over this time. Testing was carried out using a nebuliser to produce aerosol tiny particles floating in the air, but since a typical human cough actually produces large droplets which would fall to a surface more quickly than a nebuliser aerosol droplet, the validity of this survival time has to be questionable

When the virus becomes suspended in droplets smaller than 5 micrometers — known as aerosols — it can stay suspended for about a half-hour, researchers said, before drifting down and settling on surfaces where it can linger for hours. The finding on aerosol in particular is inconsistent with the World Health Organization’s position that THE VIRUS IS NOT TRANSPORTED BY AIR

Consequently, the WHO recommendation for ‘social distancing’ to reduce the spread of infection, is JUST 1m, and indeed that is the figure employed by OTHER countries, so just WHY has Britain decided to go its OWN way and that the rule here should be DOUBLE that at 2m (which of course makes life a significantly lot more difficult for EVERYBODY, and has destroyed the economy, by making it wholly UNREALISTIC or even completely IMPOSSIBLE to keep businesses open or meet downstream such Public Health England’s current social distancing lockdown advice in certain jobs, environments, businesses and industries, like say working as a beautician or hairdresser (which involves working 12in or 30cm from clients’ faces), Domino’s Pizza staff working in small space takeaways, or in construction and other outdoor work, or in air travel as social distancing is totally impractical on a modern plane, where seats are around just 45cm (17-18 inches) wide, so even leaving the middle seat free only keeps you 45cm from your neighbour, side to side and you’d need to be more than four seats apart to keep 2m away, while at airports with any volume of passengers it is “physically impossible” to be 2m apart all the time)?

Cardboard up to 24hrs– food packaging, shipping boxes

Copper up to 4 hours– coins, cookware, jewellery, electrical wires

Wood up to 2 to 4 days – tabletops, furniture, shelving.

Paper up to 4 days – paper money, letters and stationery, magazines and newspapers, tissues, paper towels, toilet paper

Glass up to 4 or 5 days – windows, mirrors, drinkware, screens for TVs, computers, and smartphones

Plastic 3 to 7 days – food packaging, water bottles and milk containers, credit cards, remote controls and video game controllers, light switches, computer keyboards and mouse, ATM buttons, toys

Stainless Steel 3 to 7 days – door handles, refrigerators, metal handrails, keys, cutlery, pots and pans, industrial equipment

Note also, that viruses can definitely be impacted by factors like temperature and humidity, so they will survive for a shorter time at higher temperatures and humidity levels.

Coronaviruses are a family group of viruses which affect your lungs and airways that usually cause mild illnesses, such as the common cold, but this one COVID-19 is much more dangerous and is now named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) while the disease associated with it is referred to as COVID-19.

This new virus is the second time in 20 years that such an infectious disease emanating from China has hit the World. In 2002 there was an outbreak of severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in southern China that caused an eventual 8,098 cases, resulting in 774 deaths reported in 17 countries (9.6% fatality rate) with the majority of cases in mainland China and Hong Kong. [However, no cases of SARS have been reported worldwide since 2004 – that gives us confidence that coronavirus will also be beaten and die out]

In late 2017, Chinese scientists claimed to have traced the virus through the intermediary of civets to cave-dwelling horseshoe bats in Yunnan province. Chinese officials have reported that several of the first cluster of cases of this latest coronavirus had ties to a live animal market where both seafood and other wildlife were sold as food, though it did not sell bats).  (The market has since been closed.) The market has become their leading hypothesis for how the virus made the leap into humans where it’s been able to spread efficiently ever since.

Coronaviruses are a group of viruses that that circulate among animals and cause diseases in mammals, and birds. After they have infected animals, they can eventually be transmitted to humans.

A wide range of animals is suspected to be the source of coronaviruses. For instance, the Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-CoV) is said to have originated from camels and the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) from civet cats

However, to some of us, knowing that all superpower nations weaponize bioweapons, it is a strange coincidence that two new virulent viruses have seemingly jumped from wild life to humans, supposedly without human intervention, in the country of an oppressive militant major Communist power which is aggressive towards the West so has a vested interest in a resulting pandemic uniquely destroying the market economies and political power of the West, wouldn’t you say?

Now, consider naturally occurring Anthrax, (which may have been the 5th one (Disease on Livestock) during the 10 plagues of Egypt), and is an infection caused by the bacterium Bacillus anthracis. It can occur in four forms: skin, lungs, intestinal, and injection – without treatment it is deadly. Anthrax is spread by contact with the bacterium’s spores, which often appear in infectious animal products. Contact is by breathing, eating, or through an area of broken skin. However, it does not typically spread directly between people. In domestic livestock and wild game ‘plant-eating’ animals, infection occurs when they eat or breathe in the spores while grazing, whence other animals may become infected by eating such infected animals, but humans can become infected through direct or indirect contact with sick animals. Usually, anthrax bacteria enter the body through a wound in the skin, though you can also become infected by eating contaminated meat or inhaling the spores.

Well, just equate in weapon principle, the current coronavirus situation with say that of anthrax which certainly has been developed as a biological-weapon by a number of countries [including Britain and USA which had produced the virulent “Ames strain” of anthrax which was later sold to many parts of the world],as although culturing large quantities of anthrax spores is a complicated task, it’s certainly within the capacity of many nations. (The accidental release of anthrax spores from a military research laboratory in the former Soviet Union city Sverdlovsk, in 1979 caused at least 79 cases of respiratory infection – and 68 deaths).

[There is evidence that the German army used anthrax to secretly infect livestock and animal feed traded to the Allied Nations by neutral partners. An example of this undercover biological warfare was the infection of Argentinian livestock intended for trade with the allied forces, resulting in the death of 200 mules in 1917 and 1918

The first mass use of anthrax spores as a weapon is said to have taken place during the Japanese occupation of China from 1932 to 1945. Anthrax may be among the most feared of biological weapons, and is acknowledged as one of the most likely sources of a bioweapon for either a single criminal or terrorist group (At the time of the fatal release of a nerve gas in the Tokyo subway in 1995, the same terrorist Aum Shinrikyo group released anthrax throughout Tokyo on at least eight occasions, but that didn’t actually result in an outbreak of disease)

After the September 11 2001 attacks on the World Trade Centre and Pentagon, letters filled with a white powder containing anthrax spores were mailed to two U.S. Senators’ offices and news media agencies along the East Coast. Authorities recovered four letters. The powder form allowed the anthrax to float in the air and for it to be breathed in, whence the first case of inhalation anthrax was diagnosed and during October and November of 2001, there were a total of 11 confirmed cases of inhalation anthrax and 11 confirmed cases of cutaneous anthrax. Of the 11 cases of inhalation anthrax, seven of the cases were postal workers who handled the letters or worked in a postal facility where the letters were processed]

That analogy is particularly so, when we know that Beijing is accused of a global cyber warfare espionage campaign against us in the West since 2006, evidenced in the US, Britain, Europe, Hong Kong, and Singapore, that sets out to destabilise government agencies, defence groups and to target high tech companies to steal trade secrets

For example, in May 2016 a cyber-attack on the British NHS crippled the organisation and cost it a hundred million pounds, and used the crypto worm malware ‘WannaCry’ (which encrypts data on infected Windows operating system computers and demands a ransom payment). It was the biggest global cyberattack offensive in history, and infected more than 300,000 computers in 150 countries. It was launched from North Korea, China’s neighbouring fellow communist ally

In the US, conspiracy theories about the origins of the coronavirus, are promoted by some politicians and are prevalent in the news and on social media. Similar rumours have also been running rampant in online forums in China

One basic rumour is that the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2, started and was engineered by humans in a Chinese lab as a bioweapon (after being isolated from animals) and either then “escaped” or “leaked” because of poor safety protocol, and one common thread is that it originated in a level 4 (the highest biosafety level) research laboratory in Wuhan. In another version, the virus was being simply being studied in the lab, but then “escaped” or “leaked” – there is an array of circumstantial clues that Chinese labs’ handling of deadly pathogens can’t be trusted (US diplomatic cables in 2018 warned of risky bat research at Wuhan lab).

A later rumour was that someone from the lab sold experimental animals to the live animal and seafood market and so “leaked the virus” from the lab. Well now, it turns out that US intelligence spy agencies have ALREADY started a full-scale investigation into Wuhan Virology Lab and its ‘role in the virus’ and whether Wuhan Virology Lab was indeed the source of virus – the suspicion being that a lab worker became ‘Patient Zero’ in a lab botched experiment accident

Meanwhile China is refuting allegations the pandemic could have originated in the laboratory but nevertheless the White House is weighing up what punishment might be dished out to Beijing over what would be the biggest government ‘cover up’ of all time

[Notwithstanding the above, it appears that current scientific consensus in the West concludes that the emergence of this brand-new coronavirus in the same city as China’s only level 4 biosafety lab (the Wuhan Institute of Virology), is pure coincidence, eh?]

Nevertheless, some of us remained unconvinced by the scientists, as releasing a virus is something that China might be prepared to do in light of the US trade war, and not least to scupper the American dream, perhaps?

However, what we do know for certain, is that at the outset the Chinese lied through their teeth to cover-up the true situation in January about coronavirus spreading in their midst, played down the seriousness of the outbreak, and tried to mislead the World about how many people it had infected in China, claiming it was numbers in the low thousands in the city of Wuhan, but as the carriers travelled abroad, our decease control public health experts soon calculated its true extent as being in the high tens of thousands by seeing its spread pattern to other countries. [The indication is that Beijing may well still be censoring and suppressing the true scale of infections (and recently deaths) to avoid local political criticism of its handling of the crisis – a nurse treating coronavirus sufferers in China claims 90,000 cases existed in late January when the official figures reported just 1,975]. Moreover, the Chinese authorities accused the doctor who disclosed in late December that this new virus existed in Wuhan, of spreading false information and they locked him up – then seemingly allowed him the die of the decease. WHY would they do ANY of those things if they didn’t have ‘something’ to hide, do you think? They need to come clean and give-out all the information they have, don’t they?

We also know that China’s scientists had the sequence of its genome, as by mid-January, they had actually shared it with the World Health Organization [did they really rush as they claim to uncover it or did they know it by engineering it in the first place, eh?]

Conspiracy theories about manmade viruses are not new [eg HIV]. However, they are really quite dangerous kinds of things to get spread around and if they persist about the origin of the health crisis, can undermine trust in public health authorities, and unnerve their communities, so its helpful if they can be effectively debunked.

[Scientists say that the new coronavirus closely resembled viruses that circulate in bats. The genetic sequence of the virus, is closely related to a bat virus – about 96% the same, says the head of the Texas Galveston National Laboratory (a level 4 biosafety lab)]

Unfortunately, there’s a long history of these “spillover” events, where an emerging disease jumps from wildlife to humans, turning into a pandemic. And scientists say we should expect them with more travel, trade, connectivity, urbanization, climate change, and ecological destruction, if we don’t stop the drivers

Face masks

Wearing a normal face mask won’t protect you from the new coronavirus as a regular surgical mask will not help you steer clear of the virus sneezes that are the main transmission route of coronavirus, as such masks are NOT effective at filtering out very small particles and viruses can still enter through the eyes

The thinner surgical mask is intended for surgeons, because these products do a good job of keeping-out pathogens (infectious biological agents that causes disease or illness to its host) from the doctor’s nose and mouth from entering the surgical field, and in some Asian countries, such as Japan and China, it’s not uncommon to see people wearing surgical masks in public to protect against pathogens. and pollution, but those masks don’t help much in the context of a virus as they’re not designed to keep out viral particles, and they’re not tightly fitted around nose and cheeks and when viruses can still enter through the eyes.

However, while some people wear surgical masks because they are sick with a cold or the flu and they don’t want to get other people sick, it’s best just not to go to public areas and stay home.

People sick with COVID-19, or even asymptomatic, should however, definitely wear face masks to reduce the risk of infection to other people around them, as even that mask will stop deadly coronavirus droplets from getting out to infect others, with the bug hanging in the air for ‘several minutes. Health care workers and those “taking care of someone infected with COVID-19 in close settings (at home or in a healthcare facility), should also wear face masks, but should dispose of them after each use

The best way to avoid getting the coronavirus is to, first and foremost, postpone any travel to places with known outbreaks. Also thoroughly wash your hands with soap and water; avoid touching your eyes, nose and mouth with unwashed hands; avoid close contact with people who are sick; and disinfect frequently touched objects and surfaces

A more specialized single use mask, known as an N95 respirator, a device designed to protect the wearer from inhaling hazardous atmospheres, including fumes, vapours, gases and particulate matter such as dusts and airborne microorganisms, but which can protect against the new coronavirus. The respirator is thicker than a surgical mask, but the experts at this point don’t recommend it for public use, as it’s challenging to put on these masks or wear them for long periods of time and specialists receive retraining annually on how to properly fit these respirators around the nose, cheeks and chin, ensuring that wearers don’t breathe around the edges of the respirator. However, the work of breathing becomes much harder, since you’re going through a very thick material, so you have to work hard to breathe in and out and it’s a bit claustrophobic, moist and hot in there – after wearing for about a half-hour you need to take it off and have a break to take some deep breaths, and cool off – they are intended only for medical workers and those professionals who need them.


  • the air-purifying respirator, in which respirable air is obtained by filtering a contaminated atmosphere and
  • the air-supplied respirator, in which an alternate supply of breathable air is delivered.

Air-purifying respirators range from relatively inexpensive single-use, disposable face masks sometimes referred to as a dust mask to more robust reusable models with replaceable cartridges often called a gas mask].

However, innovators are about who are trying to create new things to aid the World’s fight against coronavirus.

For example, after seeing a social media push among engineers to 3D print visor frames, and when it soon became clear that 3D printers weren’t going to be able to manufacture the number of face masks required for NHS staff, Stamford Endowed Schools’ Design Technology department, fortunate to have the equipment and skill set to make a real difference, set up a production line in the school’s workshops and started making face masks for frontline NHS workers during the coronavirus outbreak. After prototyping, testing and modelling it came up with a new design – a laser cut polypropylene (PP) headband attached to a polyvinyl chloride (PVC) screen and the team set up a production line in the school’s workshops. The team and are hoping to make 200 masks a day and intend to keep making them as long as the NHS need them. [indeed, many other Design Technology departments across the country have approached the NHS personal protective equipment (PPE) shortage as a design challenge]

As well as using their own resources, the team are also asking suppliers and companies to donate or supply materials and the school will also be sharing the files needed to make the product with other people who would like to join the effort to help manufacture the face masks.

Furthermore, researchers in Europe have been converting low-cost snorkel masks into ‘homemade’ respirators as protection for medical workers or to treat patients, in the battle to contain the coronavirus outbreak that has stretched healthcare resources

Medical workers from Motol hospital wear snorkel masks transformed into high-grade protection by researchers from The Czech Institute of Informatics, Robotics and Cybernetics at Czech Technical University in Prague, Czech Republic March 25, 2020. Picture taken March 25, 2020. FN Motol/Handout via REUTERS

Medical staff have been confronted with a shortage of stock of single use medical masks

To help healthcare workers, a team from the Czech Technical University (CVUT) worked with volunteers to add military-grade filters to snorkel masks, which are meant for holiday swimming and typically sell for around 600 crowns (£19/$24) in local stores- 3-D printing is used for the tubes to connect masks to oxygen ventilator machines

The researchers said that tests had showed the retrofitted masks surpassed the protection of masks carrying FFP3, considered one of the highest grade filters

They have made 2,200 pieces so far and had plans for 10,000 more.

The idea was originally proposed by Italian engineers, who put their design online, as an alternative to a more invasive technique of placing a tube directly into a sedated person’s throat when medical masks are unavailable to pump oxygen to the lungs. The design included a custom-made valve that fits to the top of full-face masks, where the snorkel is meant to go, allowing them to connect to standard BiPAP machines that feed pressurised air into masks

Medics use 3D printed valves to adapt ordinary full face snorkelling masks

•The makeshift masks help to stop coronavirus patient’s lungs collapsing

•Mask is hooked up to a BiPAP machines that feed pressurised air to patient

They are to be used for patients with severe respiratory problems. The aim is to avoid having to intubate the trachea of the patient and put them on a respirator

This helps prevent the collapse of alveoli, lung air sacs needed for the intake of oxygen into our bodies and the exhalation of carbon dioxide. Pneumonia brought on by COVID-19 inflames the lung membrane and fills those sacs with liquid

The snorkelling mask solution could be a stop-gap measure for patients on the brink of intensive-care treatment but for whom no beds nor respirators are available. Hospital masks for the less-intensive BiPAP (bilevel positive airway pressure) machines are also lacking

[    The UN has in general proved to be a pretty useless organisation but its Geneva-based WHO agency has well and truly proved its worth in dealing with world heath issues as has been fully demonstrated over the past 5 months in its attention to the coronavirus situation and information dissemination – though Donald Trump thinks NOT as earlier it hadn’t been critical enough of his trade enemy China, so he has withdrawn WHO’s funding. That seems to be an attempt by the President to shift blame for his own failures to prepare his country for this crisis, whence USA is top of the table for cases and deaths while nevertheless the lockdown has resulted in total job carnage creating the worst unemployment crisis since the Great Depression (20 million lost their jobs just last month alone and jobless rate was pushed up to nearly 15%, the highest since the Thirties – on top of that another 12 million jobs could go this month]




UK LOCKDOWN RULES – confusing and in flux?

Many of us in Britain are a little bit unclear about the current rules of the lockdown in the UK not least because of the state of fluidity and understandable but deliberate lack of clarity by the government, so this write-up is intended to explain just where things seems to be just now

For a start, the advice for those aged 70 and over (who can be absolutely fit and healthy and it’s not the case that everybody over 70 has a chronic health condition or an underlying disease) continues to be though that they should take particular care to MINIMISE contact with others outside their household (If they do go out more frequently, they should be careful to maintain distance from others. They and EVERYONE else should continue to comply with any general social distancing restrictions).

Anyone who has been advised to shield by the NHS or their GP, including those 70 and over, should continue to do this until at least the end of June – individuals with very specific medical conditions to shield until the end of June should do everything they can to stay at home, because they are likely to be at the greatest risk of serious complications from coronavirus

If you are showing coronavirus SYMPTOMS, or if YOU or any of your HOUSEHOLD are self-isolating, you should STAY AT HOME

General advice is that you should stay at home as much as possible.

The reasons you may leave home include:

•for work, where you cannot work from home

•going to shops that are permitted to be open – to get things like food and medicine

•to exercise or spend time outdoors

•any medical need, including to donate blood, avoid injury or illness, escape risk of harm, or to provide care or to help a vulnerable person

[Note that taxis are still operating during the current lockdown, but however taxis may only be taken for the above “essential” purposes]

These reasons are exceptions and even when doing these activities, you should be MINIMISING time spent away from the home and ensuring that you are two metres apart from anyone outside of your household

As a result of the March initial lockdown rules, the government passed legislation (PDF) to give it the authority to impose restrictions on people’s movements and activities. These regulations said

  1. people would not be able to leave their home without a reasonable excuse
  2. gatherings of more than TWO PEOPLE were NOT allowed, unless they were from the same household (this included family members and partners who did not live together)
  3. people should NOT visit friends in their homes or allow people to come and visit them


On May 10, NEW lockdown rules were announced would start to be introduced, which revealed several different STAGES and STEPS to the new UK’s coronavirus plan. These were detailed in a 60-page plan published by the government.

Overall, there are three phases to the UK’s Covid-19 response. These are:

  1. Phase One: which includes attempting to contain and delay the response of the virus
  2. Phase Two: introducing “smarter controls” to the lockdown response
  3. Phase Three: this final one includes creating reliable treatments and a vaccine for the virus

In addition to the three coronavirus phases, it was said that there are multiple steps to easing the lockdown and these are detailed below. However, from the middle of May there would be changes to the lockdown rules.

The new May lockdown rules relating to ENGLAND (started on May 13)

  • It is NOW ‘non-mandatory’ recommended that people wear face coverings, including MASKS and homemade masks, when they are in enclosed public spaces, such as on public transport Children will NOT be compelled to wear face coverings at school. [Face coverings can help us protect each other and reduce the spread of the disease if you are suffering from coronavirus, but not showing symptoms]
  • people who aren’t able to work from HOME should be looking to RETURN TO WORK [for the foreseeable future, workers should continue to work from home rather than their normal physical workplace, wherever possible]. People who CANNOT work from home SHOULD travel to work if their workplaces are OPEN.

This includes those working in food production, construction, manufacturing, logistics, distribution and scientific research]

  • It has been recommended that people who now have to travel to work should AVOID public transport where people are crowded-in, should consider all other forms of transport BEFORE using public transport, and should walk, cycle or drive instead, but If they can’t walk, cycle or drive to their destination, they are advised to:
    • Travel at off-peak times
    • Take a less busy route and reduce the number of changes
    • Wait for other passengers to get off before boarding
    • Keep 2m away from people “where possible” [there may be situations where people can’t keep 2m away from each other, such as at busy times or getting on or off public transport. In these cases, the advice is to avoid physical contact and face away from others]
    • Wash their hands for at least 20 seconds after completing their journey
  • People who work in PAID CHILDCARE (such as nannies and childminders), CAN return to work if they are able to follow SOCIAL DISTANCING RULES
  • people can now take “unlimited” amounts of exercise
  • some sports can now be played
  • people WILL be allowed
    • to sunbathe
    • sit in local parks [you can meet ONE OTHER PERSON from outside your household if you are OUTDOORS. Public gatherings of more than 2 people from different households are prohibited in law. There are no limits on gatherings in the park with members of your household
    • drive further to exercise [you can travel to outdoor open space irrespective of distance, but you shouldn’t travel with someone from outside your household unless you can practise social distancing – for example by cycling
    • go to a garden centre
    • play sports OUTSIDE with members of a household [use outdoor sports courts or facilities, such as a tennis or basketball court, or golf course – with members of your HOUSEHOLD, or ONE OTHER PERSON while staying 2 metres apart]

Sports courts can re-open, but you should only partake in such activities ALONE, with members of YOUR HOUSEHOLD, or with ONE OTHER PERSON from outside your household, while practising social distancing. You should take particular care if you need to use any indoor facilities next to these outdoor courts, such as toilets.

You should NOT use any of these facilities if you are showing coronavirus symptoms, or if you or any of your household are self-isolating

As with before, you CANNOT:

  • visit friends and family in their homes [However the government has asked the Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (SAGE) to advise on the concept of “bubbles”, which would mean allowing people to expand their household group to include ONE OTHER HOUSEHOLD. For the time being, you cannot visit friends or family, except to spend time OUTDOORS with up to ONE PERSON from a different household
  • exercise in an indoor sports court, gym or leisure centre, or go swimming in a public pool
  • use an outdoor gym or playground
  • visit a private or ticketed attraction
  • gather in a group of more than two (excluding members of your own household), except for a few specific exceptions set out in law (for work, funerals, house moves, supporting the vulnerable, in emergencies and to fulfil legal obligations)
  • leaving your home – the place you live – to stay at another home including visiting second homes, for a holiday or other purpose is NOT ALLOWED, although if a student is moving permanently to live back at their family home, this is permitted


The change to working rules does NOT APPLY to

  1. people who work in HOSPITALITY – including pubs, restaurants, cinemas and more
  2. those who work for NON-ESSENTIAL RETAILERS
  • One change to the rules now ALLOWS people to meet others OUTSIDE of their own home. However, this is still very limited. People can meet OUTSIDE with ONE person not from their household as long as they follow social distancing rules and stay two metres apart.
  1. All weddings have been cancelled
  2. Prisons have been put on lockdown with external visits cancelled
  3. Funerals ARE still allowed to take place but they should be limited to a person’s IMMEDIATE FAMILY (this includes spouses and partners, parents or carers, plus siblings and children). Where a grandparent has died, grandchildren can attend and if a person does not have any relatives, a close friend may attend. In all instances, funerals should follow the two metre social distancing guidelines.


In the future, there may be different levels of lockdown around England. This could see some areas with lower R numbers being allowed greater freedoms than those where the virus is more prevalent.

Why UK lockdown rules are different across the UK?

Many of the issues that face the UK can also be decided upon by the leaders of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. This is done through their own legislation and powers. During May, as the new lockdown rules started to be implemented, differences emerged between the countries. In most cases, England has moved faster than other nations.


  • travel for exercise
  • issued dates for schools reopening
  • allowed limited socialising in open spaces,
  • encouraged companies to reopen
  • Scotland has said people should wear face coverings in crowded areas, while Wales has not.
  • In NORTHERN IRELAND people ARE being allowed to travel for exercise, socialise in outdoor spaces and has told people to cover their faces in crowded public spaces.


Do we know when will the UK lockdown end?

On April 30, it was confirmed the UK had passed the PEAK of its first coronavirus outbreak. This announcement gave the first sign that the government was seriously thinking about how to end some of the lockdown measures that had been put in place.

Throughout the crisis, officials have been reluctant to put any firm dates on when measures would change. And that has not changed. “This is not the time simply to end the lockdown this week,” Johnson said on May 10. Instead the UK would start to take the “first careful steps to modify our measures”.

Johnson said there was a balance that needed to be struck between reopening the economy and ensuring the highest levels of public health protection. The government would be following science, data, and advice from public health officials as it decided which lockdown measures to ease.

The end of the lockdown is being guided by five key tests that the government is following. These tests have been designed to ensure that once people are allowed to freely move around again, there is less likelihood of a second wave of the virus appearing. The tests are largely measures of preparedness for the near-term future.

The five key tests are:

  1. the NHS having capacity to provide critical care across the UK
  2. a sustained and consistent fall in daily coronavirus deaths
  3. a decreased rate of infections
  4. enough testing and personal protective equipment are held for future demand;
  5. a confidence that adjusting the lockdown measures will not risk a second peak of infections.

One key factor to monitoring when certain lockdown restrictions will end is the R number. This is a measure of the rate of transmission of the coronavirus

The May 10 address outlined that the lockdown would also be monitored though a new system of alerts. The system works on a scale of one to five – ranging from a “low” to “critical” threat level.

Achieving a one on this scale indicates that coronavirus is not present in the UK any more. This is something that is unlikely to be reached for a long time, if it is ever achieved, and will most likely rely on a vaccine being created. At the top end of the scale, number five, there is a significant risk the NHS is not able to handle the number of coronavirus cases where patients need to be hospitalised.

The level is being determined by a Joint Biosecurity Centre, and would be measured based on the R number and the number of new cases in the country. “That Covid Alert Level will tell us how tough we have to be in our social distancing measures – the lower the level the fewer the measures,” Johnson said. “The higher the level, the tougher and stricter we will have to be.” During the lockdown the UK was at level four.

Alongside the alerts are THREE STEPS the government is introducing to ease the lockdown.

  1. STEP ONE [‘CONFIRMED’ commenced May 13] –some restrictions on who can go to work were being eased, as well as the ability to meet one person from another household and the allowance of unlimited exercise.
  2. STEP TWOUNCONFIRMED’ which may happen from June 1.
  • This step would allow a PHASED RETURN FOR SCHOOLS, with pupils from reception, year one and year six being allowed back into classrooms. “The government’s ambition is for all primary school children to return to school before the summer for a month if feasible, though this will be kept under review. The government has issued more guidance on how it believes schools can safely return. It states that the majority of staff in schools will NOT need PPE and that primary school pupils CANNOT be expected to stay two metres apart. Schools should make sure hand cleaning is done regularly, buildings are cleaned often and where possible physical contact and mixing of groups should be avoided.

The guidance also says that class sizes should be REDUCED (instead of 30 pupils in classes, groups should not number more than 15). Teachers will be allocated to the same group of pupils. Where possible, desks should be spread out further than they usually are. Corridor dividers to keep people apart, one-way systems, and limits on the number of people that can enter toilets at once are also being recommended for schools. Finally, the government says schools should look at introducing staggered pickup times for pupils to stop the amount of mixing that happens between adults from different households.

    • Also in step two could be the reopening of “non-essential retail“. The government has not outlined the types of businesses that it considered to be non-essential retailers in any detail but it is NOT thought to include pubs and similar firms
    • There’s no change at this time, but it is an intention to enable small wedding ceremonies from 1 June.


3. STEP THREE,UNCONFIRMED’ which may happen no earlier than July 4,

  • The roadmap sets out that some businesses (like pubs, cinemas) will NOT open until Step 3 is reached – but that would see the reopening of some of the HOSPITALITY INDUSTRY and other public places.
  • when this point is reached, many of the remaining lockdown measures would be eased. (this may include the reopening of hairdressers, beauty salons, pubs, hotels, and leisure facilities such as cinemas)


Do we know when will shops and pubs reopen?

The vast majority of retailers had to close their doors on March 23. The government said bars, clubs, restaurants and cafes should be closed, unless they are open for takeaways or deliveries. In addition, hair and beauty shops (including nail salons and tattoo parlours), massage parlours, auction houses, car showrooms, hotels, campsites, caravan parks, libraries, community centres, places of worship, cinemas and similar venues, museums, casinos and betting shops, spas, gyms, arcades and skating rinks should all be closed.

The government has provided extra guidance and exemptions for many of these businesses.

Supermarkets and other food shops have been allowed to stay open, as can many services that people rely on for basic needs. Banks, newsagents and corner shops, post offices, dry cleaners, home and hardware shops, petrol stations, laundrettes, pet shops, and car rentals are allowed to continue operating. As can pharmacies and market stalls that provide groceries. Shops and organisations that have stayed open have introduced extra safety measures to comply with social distancing rules. These include queue control outside shops and limits on number of people allowed in stores.

Online shopping hasn’t changed. Food deliveries, takeaways and other online shopping, including Amazon deliveries, are still happening. The government has said online shopping is “encouraged” and delivery services and the postal service are running as normal. When the government ordered restaurants to close on March 20, it said they could stay open for takeaways and deliveries. People aren’t allowed to eat food or drink while waiting for a takeaway and have to keep two metres apart while queuing.

In his May 10 announcement, it was said there could be a “phased” reopening of shops from the start of June. However, this would depend on the UK’s continued coronavirus response and a further reduction in cases. Pubs are likely to be one of the last sectors of the economy to reopen. As with the rest of the country’s retailers, the government has not set a definite date for pubs to reopen, but its roadmap to ending the lockdown says the earliest this could happen would be at the start of July.

When can I see my family?

The lockdown plans outlined by Johnson on May 10 changed very little. People are allowed to meet one person from another household as long as they are OUTSIDE from May 13, but they must keep two metres apart at all times. The lockdown rules say people cannot mix with other households.

In the future this may change. Sage, the government’s science advisory committee, is examining when it may be possible for people to spend time with one other household. “The intention of this change would be to allow those who are isolated some more social contact, and to reduce the most harmful effects of the current social restrictions, while continuing to limit the risk of chains of transmission,” the government says. Although no date has been put on when this could happen

Who now can go to work under lockdown?

Companies have been told that everyone working for them should work from home, “wherever possible”. This includes the vast majority of people who work in offices and many other professions. While restaurants are allowed to stay open serving takeaways and deliveries, many of them (including Nando’s and McDonald’s) have decided to close entirely due to the difficulties of enforcing social distancing. People who work for retailers that are allowed to stay open should speak to their employers about their individual situations.

With the closure of schools, the UK government also issued a list of who it identifies as key workers. It’s a broad list. Included are people working in health and social key, education, government, public services (including the justice system, charities and journalists), people providing food and other necessary goods, transportation services and utilities.

On May 10, Johnson said that people who can work from home should continue to do so. He did not give a date when this might change. However, he said that if people could not work from home – citing examples of people who work in construction – then they should be encouraged to return to work. “When you do go to work, if possible do so by car or even better by walking or bicycle,” the prime minister urged. He recommended that people DO NOT USE public transport where possible.

When offices do reopen things will be different. Johnson has said the government is working on guidance to make workplaces “Covid-secure”. This guidance has yet to be published. Reports say companies will have to limit hot desking and introduce protective screens to workplaces to ensure people don’t come into contact with each other. Staff canteens will stay closed and it is likely that shifts will be staggered for different employees. One team may work in an office space for one week and then switch with another team for the following week.

These measures may be added on top of other returning to work measures. Social distancing will be required in all types of workplaces and existing government guidance says face-to-face meetings should last for 15 minutes at the very most. It is likely some forms of social distancing will operate until a vaccine for coronavirus is found.

[It is going to be some months before greater clarity returns to the UK lockdown and its restrictions and that’s unfortunate since community spirit as well as the economy is currently trashed]