Who said it?

"Whether you agree with me or disagree with me; like me or loathe me, don’t bind my hands when I am negotiating on behalf of the British nation."

Theresa May?  Sounds like it.

But no, its John Major.  Yes, those were the words of John Major when he was Prime Minister in 1997. The context was he said that ruling out abolition of the pound and of joining the Euro would send him "naked into that conference chamber with nothing to negotiate, with nothing to wring the best deal out of our partners."

Fair changed his tune now has our John. Every paragraph of the speech he made at Chatham House was intended to weaken the UK’s negotiating position. It was all about talking Britain down.

Did he do damage?  Yes, sadly to himself and his own legacy.

There will be a deal.

It was more than a little odd to hear an intelligent chap like George Osborne warn against leaving EU without trade deal.  So far I have not heard anyone say we should leave the EU without a trade deal.   

Why do people have this stupid idea that leaving the EU means we won't be able to buy and sell goods with the EU countries? 

Of course we will.  

Rather than trying to add to the constant drip drip of people who lost, he should be more positive as he knows full well that, no matter what happens, we will have a trade deal with the EU when we leave.  The only choice is, will it be one under WTO rules or one under a new agreement.  But an agreement there will be.

So those who keep on saying we don’t want to end trading with the EU, fear not, you won’t.  Only those of malicious intent would say otherwise.

An agreement will be in place.

Care sector need not be in crisis.

The number of non-British EU nationals working in the UK’s social care system has shot up by more than 40% in three years, according to official figures.

Some argue that Leaving the EU will lead to a catastrophic staffing crisis across the sector.

The data released in answer to a parliamentary question by the Liberal Democrat MP Tom Brake shows the total increased from 65,000 in December 2013 to 92,000 by September last year, the most recent date for which figures are available.   The proportion of the social care workforce from other European countries varies by region, from 2% in the north-east to 12% in London, showing how a system already suffering recruitment problems is hugely reliant on EU workers in large parts of the country. In all, European workers make up 7% of a social care workforce of 1.34 million.  And they’re all low paid, mostly on the minimum wage.

Let’s step back for a moment.  We have unemployment in the UK.  Why are people in the UK not doing these jobs?  Why can we not train those who are unemployed to fill these 93,800 vacancies? 

Too low paid I hear you say.  Well, I would agree with you.  But money has to come from somewhere.  And it should not come from increased taxation.  All that does is reduce the amount of money people can spend on goods and services.  Cut that and you create unemployment in the very productive sector we need to stimulate.  Indeed, the very sector that pays for Doctors, Nurses, Care workers, Policemen, Firefighters, roads and hospitals.

I say we totally change how we do taxation.  Have very simple tax banding.  And end this crazy situation where we have people and businesses interacting with the tax system on multiple levels. 

Like a person who is in employment on a low wage gets benefits from the tax payer at the same time a business has to pay many different levels of tax.  Put it simply we should tax the business less and raise the minimum wage by an equivalent amount.  Then you don’t have a bureaucracy collecting and paying out tax. 

It is fiscally neutral for both the employee and the employer.  But you will have saved millions on bureaucracy.   Yes, I know it will take a bit of working out to do. But we need to be radical as we are living in an unsustainable bubble.

Back to care workers.  Let’s train our own from our own unemployed.  Let’s pay them properly.  And let’s stop saying all will be gloom and doom when we leave the EU.  It won’t.

The Constitution wins.

The one thing the USA prides itself on is the separation of powers.  And it seems to work well. And has done since the Constitution was drafted.   Put simply, no one is above the law.  Not even a president as Nixon and Clinton found out.

So, perhaps Mr Trump hasn’t been reading the same Constitution as Judge James Robart, a man appointed by another Republican President, George W Bush, and confirmed unanimously by the Senate.

In what was rather foolish and intemperate language given the separation of powers, Mr Trump called the ruling "ridiculous" and Mr Robart a "so-called judge".

Indeed, if, as it appears to be, it is a direct challenge to judicial independence by President Trump, I think the new president is going to be in for a surprise when things come to the Supreme Court, no matter how many of them he appoints.  They won’t back him; they will back the Constitution, every time.

World to put anyone who tests a missile "on notice".

Let me try and get my head around this.  The US is going to impose sanctions unilaterally on Iran because it tested a ballistic missile.  I think I’ve got that straight.

So why are the USA not imposing sanctions against the UK for testing a Trident missile last year?  

Or France for testing nuclear air-launched cruise missile.

Or the USA itself.  They fired a specially configured non-armed “test” version of the Trident II D5 missile from the Atlantic Ocean off the coast of Florida on 31st August last year.  This was the 161^st successful Trident II launch since design completion in 1989.  So that’s quite a few.

So, countries that the USA likes can go on testing missile delivery systems that can hold nuclear warheads, but others can’t.  Bit of one rule for you, one rule for me.

His White House national security adviser, Michael Flynn, said the administration was putting Iran "on notice" for its missile test.  

That being the case, President Trump, I assume, won’t mind at all if all the other nations in the world put the USA “on notice” if the USA doesn’t cease from testing missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads.

Seems fair to me.

Yes, he did say it.

He just didn't like the answer the people gave.

Who bans whom?

Here is an odd one.  It seems half the world is up in arms about President Trump banning people from seven countries to the USA.

Why is it odd?  Well, two reasons really.  On one hand Trump is simply continuing, in a way, the well documented polices of his predecessors, Obama and Bush.  So he is not really doing anything particularly new.  Just a bit more in your face.

The second?  The policy of banning people because of their country of origin is actually incredibly widespread.  Sixteen countries already discriminate exactly in this way and have done so for some considerable time.  They ban the people from one country, or indeed, people who have visited this country, from stepping foot on their soil.

The counties who already practice this discrimination?  Algeria, Bangladesh, Brunei, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Lebanon, Libya, Malaysia, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, Syria, United Arab Emirates and Yemen. 

So why are there not worldwide protests at the behaviour of these countries that are doing the exact same thing as Trump, Obama and Bush have done? Banning people.

You might not like Trump.  But even the most anti Trump person must realise that to turn a blind eye and not to demonstrate against the 16 Muslim majority countries that are practicing this discrimination, is hypocritical.

Or maybe Israelis don’t matter. 

And before you tell me Israel refused entry to 115 British citizens in 2016 amid 'discriminatory' treatment of pro-Palestinian activists, I know.  

Travel advice from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office(FCO) warns that Israeli border officials may require travellers to sign pledges not to enter the Palestinian territories without authorisation.  It says access to travellers’ personal e-mail or social media accounts has been requested as a condition of entry.   Which when you think of it is pretty outrageous.  Or that British nationals of Palestinian origin “may face problems”.  So it’s not a total ban against people of another country. So, while it is a ban, its a selective ban. 

My point is, Bush, Obama and now Trump are just doing what countries like the 16 and Israel are doing for years.  And no one seems to organise million people protests against them.  

And just for the record, which country doesn't ban Muslims?  Israel.

How the UK helped save 15,000 lives.

Some 25 years ago the UK Conservative government boldly decided to do something about the death toll on our roads.  They would set up a proper crash testing procedure.  Up till then all car manufactures had to do was meet a minimum standard.  And they were under no obligation to tell the public of the results of any tests that they did carry out.

In spite of test proposals being strongly resisted by the car industry, in June 1994, the UK Department of Transport proceeded towards the setup of a New Car Assessment Programme in the UK.

In November of 1996, the Swedish National Road Administration (SNRA), the Federation Internationale de l’Automobile (FIA) and International Testing were the first organisations to join the car safety test programme.  This resulted in Euro NCAP being formed. Its inaugural meeting was held in December 1996.

From the beginning, the programme was ambitious and comprehensive.  There was a determination to ensure that the testing and assessment was scientifically based.

For the first phase of tests in 1997, seven super mini sized cars were chosen and the manufacturers were asked to supply information about those cars.  For comparative testing, the tests had to be carried out to a higher standard than was necessary for legislation.  And the public would be told the results. 

The results changed everything.  Some cars like the Rover 100 performed so badly that production ceased. 

On the same day the test results were published, the car manufacturers heavily criticised the NCAP, its tests and its ratings.  One of the many claims was that the assessment criteria were so severe that no car could achieve four stars, for occupant protection.  Scaremongering of the first order. 

But the reality was 4 stars were achievable.  In July 1997, the results from the second phase of tests were published and the Volvo S40 became the first 4-star car for occupant protection.  The impossible was achieved.  Manufactures in pretty short time, started to achieve 4 stars.  And since them it is estimated the tests have saved over 15,000 lives and countless serious injuries avoided.

I tell you this story for two reasons.

First, because it is pertinent to the way we now view the European Union (EU).  Notice how it worked.  The UK led by John Major, decided they would do something to stop needless deaths on the UK roads.  Sweden joined in.  They did something that then was adopted across the whole of Europe.  But in no way was this a creation by the EU.

The difference today is it is now legislation comes from the European Commission (EC) and the European Courts of Justice (ECJ), which is a bit of a weird name for a court that, in effect, is a quasi-parliament in that it effectively makes law, but unlike in any democratic county, without the need for it be scrutinised in a legislative chamber.

Top down, not bottom up, is how the EU and all its institutions work.  No accountability.  Indeed, as the House of Commons library has said, it is possible to justify any figure between 15 and 55 per cent of how much UK law now emanates from the EC, and the ECJ with no UK parliament scrutiny or ability to amend or reject it. 

This is how it works. The European Commission (unelected) creates laws for us.  The UK parliament can only rubber-stamp them.  The whole system is overseen by the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ, and unelected), which has ultimate jurisdiction over our UK parliament and law courts.

Sir Richard Aikens, a judge in the Court of Appeal 2008-15 and Michael Howard take a different approach.  “The idea at the heart of our democracy is not complicated.  At a general election, the voters choose who makes the laws that govern our lives. If governments fail to live up to their promises, the electorate throw them out.” 

Clearly, a majority of those who voted in the EU referendum agree.  That is what we are voting to leave the European Union and all its parts.

And secondly, the case of Volvo.  All the naysayers said 4 stars were impossible.  Which has a certain resonance in the language used by many, particularly on the Labour, Liberal Democrat and SNP benches in the two days of debate in our UK parliament on the triggering of Article 50. 

Actually, it can.  And quite possibly in a lot less than 24 months.  Indeed, the EU's chief negotiator says we have 18 months.

Volvo rose to the challenge and easily achieved 4 stars while many other manufactures dragged their feet moaning about how it could never be done.  But they soon caught on once consumers started changing their buying patterns and were soon regularly performing with 4 stars.

The so called “remoaners” should take heed and learn from Volvo.