The Herald reports:

A law change aiming to protect teenagers from forced marriages has passed its first hurdle – and a National MP says it will stop girls being “exported” to New Zealand.

A private member’s bill in the name of National MP Joanne Hayes passed its first reading in Parliament last night with backing from all parties.

It will require 16- and 17-year-olds who wish to marry to apply to the court and get the consent of a Family Court judge. Currently parental consent is needed in such cases.

A very useful safeguard. I suspect most people marrying at that age are do so through family pressure.

Hayes told Parliament child marriage and forced marriage “are the most horrific culture practices that could happen”.

“There are horrific stories that I have heard to do with forced marriage and child marriage that just absolutely sicken me, and we must ensure that they must stop here in New Zealand before they get legs and carry on,” said Hayes, who paid tribute to former National MP and now Human Rights Commissioner Jackie Blue, who introduced the bill to the member’s ballot in 2012.

Hayes said that between 2002 and 2011 there were 798 young brides in New Zealand, 388 of whom married overseas. About 80 16- and 17-year-olds marry a year.

“We know that some girls also are exported to New Zealand for the purposes of forced marriage. All this has to do with a fee to parents, a bit of a story given to the young woman who is told, ‘you come over here, you’ll get free education, we’ll look after you’.

“And they end up as slaves in an unwanted marriage and one that ends in violence, to the point that we hear stories of where young women lose their lives, and there is no justice for them.”

Terrible that this occurs.

The Herald reports:

New Zealand has signed a deal with the United States which will allow it to find out whether multinationals are paying enough tax in this country.

Revenue Minister Judith Collins, who is at an OECD conference in Paris, said New Zealand was one of the first countries in the world to sign such a bilateral agreement. She hailed it as “great news” in the fight to get large corporates to pay their fair share of tax.

Beginning in 2018, Inland Revenue will receive more information about US companies operating in New Zealand, and will reciprocate with information about NZ companies.

“This will further enhance Inland Revenue’s risk assessment processes to make sure that the right amount of tax is being paid,” Collins said.

That’s a very useful agreement. Being able to see how much tax the companies are paying in the US will help assessments as to how much they should pay in NZ.

Stuff reports:

MPs will be forced to vote on whether or not euthanasia should be legal, after the End of Life Choice bill was drawn from Parliament’s ballot. 

A bill to legalise the use of medicinal cannabis if prescribed by a medical practitioner, was also pulled for debate. 

The euthanasia bill, by ACT leader David Seymour, has laid dormant in the House’s infamous biscuit tin since 2015. …

While euthanasia would be a conscience vote – meaning MPs would vote individually, rather than along part lines – it was a political landmine both Key and Opposition leader Andrew Little had gone to lengths in the past to avoid. 

Now the bill has been drawn from ballot box, it was out of the Government’s hands. 

I’m glad the bill was drawn. I think most people want to see Parliament vote on this issue. It is not an abstract issue, but something that is very real and painful and poignant for many families.

I have an archive of public polls on euthanasia at Curia.

My personal view is that so long as you have strong safeguards, people of sound mind should be able to seek assistance to end their lives if they are in terrible pain and suffering.

Brian Edwards writes:

I have been a vocal opponent of capital punishment all my adult life. I have given speeches, written articles, debated the rights and wrongs of it. And my position has never changed: the state has no more right to take a life than the individual. Life is sacred.

I now find myself, quite inconsistently, making an exception.

Terrorism, the random slaughter of innocent people without just cause, to make a point, can never be defended, or forgiven.

I now believe that the terrorist is entitled to fair trial.

But if the verdict is ‘guilty’ then that individual, who placed no value on the lives of innocent men, women and children, should have the same value placed on his/her own life. None!

Mad dogs just have to be put down.

Life is sacred, but not to the mad dogs who slaughter eight year olds at concerts and slit the throats of people at cafes.

Former FBI Director Comey’s testimony is on the Senate website. A fascinating insight into how Trump’s mind works, and his total ignorance of concepts such as independence.

Some extracts:

I spoke alone with President Obama twice in person (and never on the phone) – once in 2015 to discuss law enforcement policy issues and a second time, briefly, for him to say goodbye in late 2016. In neither of those circumstances did I memorialize the discussions. I can recall nine one-on-one conversations with President Trump in four months – three in person and six on the phone.

Imagine in the NZ context if the Prime Minister had nine private meetings or conversations with the Commissioner of Police in four months. It would be seen as very unusual.

The President began by asking me whether I wanted to stay on as FBI Director, which I found strange because he had already told me twice in earlier conversations that he hoped I would stay, and I had assured him that I intended to. He said that lots of people wanted my job and, given the abuse I had taken during the previous year, he would understand if I wanted to walk away. My instincts told me that the one-on-one setting, and the pretense that this was our first discussion about my position, meant the dinner was, at least in part, an effort to have me ask for my job and create some sort of patronage relationship

And then:

I added that I was not “reliable” in the way politicians use that word, but he could always count on me to tell him the truth. I added that I was not on anybody’s side politically and could not be counted on in the traditional political sense, a stance I said was in his best interest as the President. A few moments later, the President said, “I need loyalty, I expect loyalty.” I didn’t move, speak, or change my facial expression in any way during the awkward silence that followed. We simply looked at each other in silence. The conversation then moved on, but he returned to the subject near the end of our dinner. …

Near the end of our dinner, the President returned to the subject of my job, saying he was very glad I wanted to stay, adding that he had heard great things 4 about me from Jim Mattis, Jeff Sessions, and many others. He then said, “I need loyalty.” I replied, “You will always get honesty from me.” He paused and then said, “That’s what I want, honest loyalty.” I paused, and then said, “You will get that from me.” As I wrote in the memo I created immediately after the dinner, it is possible we understood the phrase “honest loyalty” differently, but I decided it wouldn’t be productive to push it further

You want the FBI DIrector to be loyal to the Constitution and to the law, not to a particular politician.

Shortly afterwards, I spoke with Attorney General Sessions in person to pass along the President’s concerns about leaks. I took the opportunity to implore the Attorney General to prevent any future direct communication between the President and me. I told the AG that what had just happened – him being asked to leave while the FBI Director, who reports to the AG, remained behind – was inappropriate and should never happen.

I don’t think Trump was acting with malice in what he did, more ignorance. But it is a dangerous ignorance as he sees the model for the US presidency being more authoritarian than constrained.

The latest poll, a One News Colmar Brunton is out. Details are at Curia.

National is at 49% which is incredibly high for a party in their 9th year of Government. By contrast Labour at the same stage in their last Government was at 29% in the May 2008 poll.

Stuff reports:

The Crown decided last year it no longer needed the former ministerial residence. When the Commissioner of Crown Lands offered it to Wellington SPCA and the Vogel Charitable Trust – who were beneficiaries of Jocelyn’s will – a legal battle ensued.

Jocelyn’s grandsons requested a rehearing, and an investigation by an independent lawyer. In an unexpected twist, the independent lawyer advised that neither the Vogels nor the two charities should be given the property.

The parties were this week told Vogel House would instead be sold on the open market, with the proceeds going to the Crown.

Wellington SPCA boss Steve Glassey said it was a “sad outcome” for the two amazing Wellington charities who desperately needed the money to care for animals and the needy people of Lower Hutt. 

It is sad, and if the Vogel grandsons had not contested the original decision, the SPCA would have benefited hugely.

The case comes amid calls for changes to succession laws to better honour will-makers’ last wishes.

Glassey said the case was just one of many in which charities, and the community, lost out. He estimated three-quarters of SPCA bequests were challenged by family members, costing $500,000 to $1 million a year.

“People should be warned that, despite family members saying they won’t contest, soon after the casket is lowered they are clawing at the money,” Glassey said. “Sadly, your word is no longer law.”

He advocated removing the right for independent, adult children to dispute their parents’ wills – a change Law Commission recommended in 1997.

I’d support that, so long as the person was clearly of sounds mind when making the will. If someone wants to leave their estate to the SPCA they should be able to without challenge.

Stuff reports:

A $30 million housing project at Wellington’s Erskine College has been given the go-ahead after legal issues with heritage groups that threatened to stall the project were ironed out.

The Save Erskine College Trust (SECT) and Heritage New Zealand have given approval to most of the development of the former Catholic girls’ school in the seaside suburb of Island Bay.

Under the agreement, developer Ian Cassels’ Wellington Company can start work on the development while further engineering, design and feasibility work is done on the main convent building and chapel.

I have very fond memories of Erskine, having fled there chased by nuns on a couple of occasions they became aware my secondary school self was on the premises in the evening.

If the main convent building can be saved the development may lose a proposed early childcare facility and cafe.

But the project will still include a $7m restoration of Erskine’s historic chapel and a refurbishment of its wedding/function centre and restoration of the Reverend Mother’s Garden, Cassels said.

A cafe up there would be great.

Duncan Garner writes:

The Greens’ chances of being in power still rely on Labour. Bugger that, but that’s the rough path they have chosen.

They have fully hitched their wagon to a struggling Labour locomotive.

If Labour gets in a position to govern then the Greens might have some influence. If they don’t, then the Greens are once again assigned to the oblivion benches again.

Damn, that must be frustrating. Why burn all that carbon in planes and taxis getting to Parliament if you can’t make a difference?

Yes, they’re a strong voice in opposition but surely they want to be in power one day – don’t they? But they’ve chosen to work only with Labour.

Apparently, National is evil, too Right-wing, doesn’t care about the environment, has made our rivers dirty and the list goes on. But I wonder what life would be like if they hadn’t thrown their lot in with just Labour.

What would a Blue-Green government look like? Imagine if the Greens had left the door open to prop up either of the big parties in office? Is Labour really that economically different from National?

Why couldn’t the Greens have been truly independent and said we’ll keep both the bastards honest and just fight for our principles and influence in any government we can be part of?

It would be great to have an independent Green party that was similiar to the Maori Party – we’ll work constructively with whichever party is in power, supporting them on supply and confidence in return for some big policy gains on the issues we think are most important.

When the Labour-Green memorandum of understanding to work together came out, Jesus wept and so did the centre-Left. Labour and Green voters went all weak at the knees.

All those voters thought enough had been done to govern and it was only a matter of time. But I thought it was a stupid deal that assigned the Greens as Labour’s Mini Me.

They closed off their options and became Labour’s little play thing.

The moment they said we will only support a Labour-led Government, they threw away any influence they had, and any ability to stop Winston blocking them from Government if he holds the balance of power.

The Guardian reports:

The son of an Indian immigrant who came out as gay in 2015 will be the next Irish prime minister, after he was voted leader of the country’s main governing party.

Leo Varadkar’s victory in the Fine Gael leadership contest on Friday, which took place after outgoing PM Enda Kenny announced his resignation last month, marks another significant step forward for equality in the country, after 2015’s gay marriage referendum.

As well as becoming Ireland’s first gay prime minister, Varadkar, 38, will also become the country’s youngest leader, and the first from an ethnic minority background. His position will be confirmed later this month when parliament resumes after a break.

Varadkar’s party is the main centre-right, not left, party in Ireland.  He was not elected because of his background, he simply was elected because he has been a strong Minister. In his own words:

“it’s not something that defines me. I’m not a half-Indian politician, or a doctor politician or a gay politician for that matter. It’s just part of who I am, it doesn’t define me, it is part of my character I suppose”

He is a trained doctor, as is his partner.

It is the 6th of June here in the US and so even though I am a day late for NZ readers nonetheless early June commemorates two great events in military history.

The D – Day Landings
Today is the 73rd anniversary of D – Day. Operation Overlord still to this day is the single largest invasion in all military history. It began the Allied liberation of western Europe and it hastened the end of Hitler’s Nazi regime. Commonwealth nations tend to view D – Day in its entirety focusing on the five beaches that were assaulted that day (Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword) and they understandably focus on the efforts of the mostly British and Canadian forces at Gold, Juno and Sword beaches. Here in the US, almost all commemorations of D-Day concentrate on Omaha beach as it was the site of the most intense opposition with the eventual securing of the beach head coming at a comparatively enormous cost of casualties compared to the other four beaches.

The magnitude of the task and the slaughter at Omaha beach was perhaps the most dramatically illustrated in the first 25 minutes of Stephen Spielberg’s epic Oscar winning 1998 movie Saving Private Ryan. Spielberg did not set out to create a blockbuster box office success, he merely wanted to appropriately honour his father’s war service by recreating as accurately as possible what he and his comrades-in-arms went through at D – Day. The brutal realism of war depicted in Saving Private Ryan was described by a WW 2 vet I know who recently passed away as “touchingly terrible and terribly touching”. Whilst Spielberg adopted a filming style that closely replicated the real footage taken by the US Army’s own cameramen sent to follow the first wave of troops at Omaha, he did draw on what has come to be described as THE definitive record of what transpired at Omaha on June 6th from the work of US Army Historian S.L.A. Marshall who assembled a range of first hand eye witness accounts of what happened and assembled it into a harrowing essay entitled “The First Wave at Omaha” and published first in the Atlantic magazine in November of 1960. The entire account is re-printed here and it is not for the faint hearted https://nebraskaenergyobserver.wordpress.com/2014/06/07/first-wave-at-omaha-beach-s-l-a-marshall/.

Three years ago, I visited the Normandy beaches with an old high school mate en-route to WW 1 battlefields in Flanders in Belgium and France in search of his great uncle’s grave. We visited the US cemetery located on a plateau above Omaha at Colleville-sur-Mer, France. After going through the stunning US museum (the best of many great museums in Normandy), we trekked down a steep path past German pillboxes and bunkers still embedded in the side of the hill to the beach itself. Looking up to the plateau from the beach, one got a sense of why this assault was so very difficult (we had been to Utah beach first near Sainte-Marie-du-Mont and it was a cakewalk in comparison).

We ended our time at Omaha walking in the cemetery of the almost 10,000 US soldiers who were killed securing Utah and Omaha with 95% of these casualties occurring at Omaha. Now I had no family or connection to these graves and in fact knew no one who even had a relative who was lost at D Day and yet I was not prepared for the amazing emotions that swept over me as I walked through the row upon row of beautifully manicured graves. I found tears streaming down my face as I contemplated the sheer enormity of what happened there back in 1944. I noticed that various others at the cemetery were similarly overcome and many were French citizens as apparently the largest number of visitors there are not US tourists but the French who come to pay homage to the site where their liberation began. If you are ever in France, I strongly urge you to take the time to visit the Normandy beaches (they are about a 2½ drive from Paris) and you will not be disappointed.

The 6 Day War in Israel
June 5th celebrates the 50th anniversary of the end of one of the most extraordinary wars in all human history – that of the 6 Day War between Israel and its Arab neighbours (Egypt, Jordan and Syria). The 6 Day War has been often described as the most decisive military victory in the modern era of warfare, perhaps in the history of all wars.

Israel’s Arab League neighbours, led by the aggressive plans of Anwar Sadat [EDIT: Nasser] to avenge Egypt’s losses in the 1948 War of Independence and the 1956 Suez Canal conflict with Israel, laid plans to snuff out the still young state of Israel. With combined 3:1 advantage in armour and equipment and a 200:1 edge in combined Arab military spending over Israel, Israel faced the possibility of military annihilation. Israel’s defense chiefs laid plans for a preemptive strike to attack her neighbours before they attacked her. When Egypt closed the Straights of Tiran from the Red Sea shutting off her main supply line of oil shipments into the Port of Aqaba, this was sufficient casus belli for Israel to strike first.

On the night of June 4th, Israeli commandoes laid mines and underwater bombs designed to go off on the morning of June 5th crippling key ships of the Egyptian navy that ensured that Israel’s small navy would control all approaches to Israel from the Mediterranean. At a moment, precisely timed when Egyptian Air Force commanders were trapped in their staff cars in gridlocked Cairo traffic, the Israeli Air Force began a low-level bombing campaign of Egyptian airfields. Over a period of 3 hours, the IAF flew some 500 sorties back and forth, refueling at breakneck speed so that by the morning of the first day, they had destroyed more than half of the Egyptian Air Force and rendered all its airfields incapable of use. With air supremacy over the Sinai Desert, the Israeli Army could deploy rapidly across the Sinai and in by the end of the second day they had completely routed the Egyptians on the ground and had captured all the territory from Gaza to the Suez Canal.

Throughout the first two days of the war, Israel told Jordan and Syria to stay out or they would be attacked. On the third day, the Jordanians began shelling Jewish sites in west Jerusalem and so on the morning of the 7th of June, the IAF also destroyed the entire Jordanian and most of the Syrian Air Forces. The next two days saw a brutal struggle for the control of the remainder of Jerusalem with house by house and street by street battles until by the end of the fourth day, the Israelis had captured all of Jerusalem and the entire West Bank.

On Day 5 the Syrians began shelling Israeli villages from the Golan Heights and so Israel, having already annihilated the Syrian Airforce, engaged in an incredible tank battle for the Golan Heights. Israeli tanks were outnumbered 2 sometimes 3 to one but fought brilliant tactical battles and first withstood the onslaught of the Syrian tanks and then gained the upper hand, overran the Golan Heights and drove the Syrian Army up the main road to Damascus so fast that by the time the UN brokered a cease fire on June 10th, the IDF were only 15 miles from Damascus!

Michael Oren has been a prominent Israeli academic and then politician and was for some years the Israeli Ambassador to the US. His book “6 Days of War” is still the best definitive account of this extraordinary war. He recently summarized not only the impact of the 6 Day War but was able to put it into a great historical context with other crucial milestones in Israeli history https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/04/opinion/six-day-war-arab-israeli-anniversary.html
• the signing of the Balfour Declaration outling the British desire for a Palestinian and Jewish state in Palestine – this year is the 100th anniversary of its signing;
• The Peel Commission – UK House of Lords Committee that drew tentative boundaries for Jewish and Palestinian States – this year is the 80th anniversary;
• The UN Declaration of Independence – this year is the 70th anniversary of that landmark decision that paved the way to the formal formation of the State of Israel on May 14th, 1948.

The consequences of the 6 Day War are still reverberating through the region to this day with Israel still retaining the West Bank and Golan Heights as a security buffer from the Palestinians and Syrians respectively. Despite the bitter conflict in 1967 (and the Yom Kippur War in 1974), Israel still made a lasting peace with Egypt and Jordan. It holds out hope of a similar peace with Syria, Hamas, Hezbollah and the Palestinian Authority.

Stats NZ reports:

The merchandise terms of trade rose 5.1 percent in the March 2017 quarter, reaching its highest level since June 1973, Stats NZ said today.

Terms of trade is a measure of the purchasing power of New Zealand’s exports abroad. A 5.1 percent rise in the March quarter means New Zealand can buy 5.1 percent more imports for the same amount of exports.

“The current high in the terms of trade is a result of a strong upwards trend in the terms of trade since 2000,” business prices manager Sarah Williams said today.

In the March 2017 quarter, export prices rose 8.0 percent. Export dairy prices rose 18 percent, following a 14 percent rise in the December 2016 quarter. Despite these two large increases, dairy prices remain 21 percent lower than the recent high in the March 2014 quarter.

In the March 2017 quarter, import prices rose 2.7 percent, influenced by a price rise for crude oil. Crude oil is still about half its mid-2012 price. However, since the end of 2008, import prices have fallen by about a quarter, with price falls for imported manufactured goods influenced by quality improvements. More powerful electronic goods are an example of a quality improvement.

During the early 1970s, export commodity prices for dairy, meat, and wool began to increase, pushing the terms of trade to its highest level. However, this boom for export prices was short-lived, and New Zealand’s terms of trade fell after key export market Great Britain joined the European Economic Community, and after the first big oil crisis pushed up fuel prices sharply in late 1973.

So our best terms of trade since the UK joined the EU. Think about that.

This chart from interest.co.nz tells a story.  The declining costs of imports is a major contributor. A reminder of why we benefit from fewer trade barriers.

The Herald reports:

Four Arab nations cut diplomatic ties to Qatar early Monday morning, and Bahrain has given citizens 14 days to leave the country.

The decision further deepens a rift between Gulf Arab nations over Qatar’s support for Islamist groups.

Bahrain, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates all announced they would withdraw their diplomatic staff from Qatar, a gas-rich nation that will host the 2022 FIFA World Cup.

Saudi Arabia said the move was made for the “protection of national security” and Qatari troops would be pulled from its ongoing war in Yemen.

Bahrain blamed Qatar’s “media incitement, support for armed terrorist activities and funding linked to Iranian groups to carry out sabotage and spreading chaos in Bahrain” for its decision.

It has reportedly given Qatari residents 14 days to leave Bahrain.

All the nations also said they planned to cut air and sea traffic to the peninsular country.

If Qatar really has been supporting terrorist activities, this might be a good thing. But I suspect it is not as simple as that.

Today

• NZ beat UK twice
• UK lost to NZ twice
• Japan beat Sweden once and lost to them once
• Sweden beat Japan once and lost to them once

Points

• NZ 2
• Japan 1
• Sweden 1
• UK 0

If a challenger gets to five points (there are up to nine races) they qualify for the Louis Vuitton Final.

The Australian reports:

When even the journalists union is decrying the appointment as too partisan, you know it is an appalling appointment. Makes you question the wisdom of those on the Australian Press Council that made the appointment

Amy Baker Benjamin is a law lecturer at AUT. She also recently appeared on The Project. Her resume includes this article:

Benjamin, A., 9/11 As False Flag:  Why International Law Must Dare to Care, African J. Int’l & Comp. L. (forthcoming July-Aug. 2017)

I’ve been sent a link to what appears to be her paper, which is proudly cited by AUT. Some extracts:

Despite the impressive and serious body of literature that has emerged to suggest that 9/11 was a classic (if unprecedentedly monstrous) false-flag attack, international statesmen, following the lead of scholars, have acted as if there is no controversy whatsoever.

Will AUT also be publishing papers on how the moon landings were faked?

In the days and weeks following 9/11, the U.N. accepted without hesitation or scrutiny the American claim to have been attacked by elements of international terrorism.

I suspect most of them saw the “claims” fly into the Twin Towers.

Moreover, despite the impressive body of serious literature that has emerged since 9/11 challenging the official version of the attacks and strongly suggesting that they were either perpetrated by elements of the U.S. Government or allowed by them to happen

This is vile stuff, masquerading as well something to do with the law.

I demand we also investigate how the US Government perpetrated Pearl Harbour.

Scholars as a group scurry away from the controversy surrounding the official version of 9/11 as if it were the intellectual equivalent of kryptonite.

Reputable scholars scurry away from it because it is as reputable as denying the Holocaust happened.

What a bunch of lying embittered losers.

Once she was out of politics, John Key gave Helen Clark the highest Honour there is – Order of New Zealand. He supported her campaign for UNDP Administrator and gave her 100% support in her campaign to be UN Secretary-General. He also knighted Michael Cullen and gave him significant board appointments.

Key is retired and out of politics. But the nasty losers at Labour are so choking on their bile they actually authorise an advertisement smearing and attacking him for getting a knighthood. Have you seen anything so petty before? They also repeat their lie about taking $1.7 billion out of the health sector when in fact Vote Health increased $4.8 billion in nominal terms, $3.0 billion in real terms and by over 10% in real per capita terms.

God they really are the nasty party.

Stuff reports:

At present using CBD products for therapeutic use is an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act unless approval is given by the Ministry of Health.

Dunne said he had taken advice from advisors that CBD should not be a controlled drug.

“Cabinet has now accepted my recommendation to make this change,” he said.

“Therefore, I am now taking steps to remove restrictions accordingly.

“In practical terms, the changes mean CBD would be able to be prescribed by a doctor to their patient and supplied in a manner similar to any other prescription medicine.”

Australia had already taken a similar step and other countries were responding to emerging evidence that CBD had a low risk of harm when used therapeutically, Dunne said.

The change was unlikely to lead to a deluge of people taking up medicinal cannabis as the supply of CBD was hampered by quality control and import issues, Dunne said.

Seems a very sensible decision.

HDPA writes:

The Green Party has been nothing but impressive over the last fortnight. So impressive, in fact, it’s tempting to predict a future where the Greens become the major party of the left.

Or that may be Winston?

It says everything about the list that, after its release, it took me hours to register just how many women are in the top 20. There are 12.

This is extraordinary. A sitting party releasing a majority-women list without a moment of controversy must be unprecedented in our politics. The Greens made it look as normal as brushing your teeth.

They made it look as if there really are enough capable women available for selection, as if there are times when the woman is a better choice than the man, as if we’re living in 2017.

Contrast that to Labour.

That party has consistently managed to make an inferior version of this outcome far more painful.

Yep the Greens did it well.

National snookered everyone with its Robin Hood cash-for-the-poor package. So the Greens made the only move available and voted for that part of the Budget that would put money in the pockets of people who need it.

Not Labour. Oh no. Labour had the audacity to vote against a measure that will benefit its core supporters.

Labour voted against a measure that will reduce the number of children in “poverty” by a third. Yet they claim that is their main purpose as a party.

If Labour was a pet, I’d be about ready to take it to the vet and put it out of its misery.

Ouch.

Theresa May writes:

Enough is enough. …

We cannot and must not pretend that things can continue as they are. Things need to change, and they need to change in 4 important ways.

First, while the recent attacks are not connected by common networks, they are connected in one important sense. They are bound together by the single, evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division, and promotes sectarianism.

It is an ideology that claims our Western values of freedom, democracy and human rights are incompatible with the religion of Islam. It is an ideology that is a perversion of Islam and a perversion of the truth.

Defeating this ideology is one of the great challenges of our time. But it cannot be defeated through military intervention alone. It will not be defeated through the maintenance of a permanent, defensive counter-terrorism operation, however skilful its leaders and practitioners.

It will only be defeated when we turn people’s minds away from this violence – and make them understand that our values – pluralistic, British values – are superior to anything offered by the preachers and supporters of hate.

Is it vital to stand up for the values of freedom and democracy and reject theocracy.

Second, we cannot allow this ideology the safe space it needs to breed. Yet that is precisely what the internet – and the big companies that provide internet-based services – provide.

We need to work with allied, democratic governments to reach international agreements that regulate cyberspace to prevent the spread of extremism and terrorist planning. And we need to do everything we can at home to reduce the risks of extremism online

The UK seem fixated on regulating cyberspace. It isn’t that simple. Twitter and Facebook delete thousands of jihadist accounts every week. But you will never be able to stop people freely communicating on the Internet.

Third, while we need to deprive the extremists of their safe spaces online, we must not forget about the safe spaces that continue to exist in the real world.

Yes, that means taking military action to destroy ISIS in Iraq and Syria. But it also means taking action here at home. While we have made significant progress in recent years, there is – to be frank – far too much tolerance of extremism in our country.

Hear, hear.

So we need to become far more robust in identifying it and stamping it out – across the public sector and across society.

That will require some difficult and often embarrassing conversations, but the whole of our country needs to come together to take on this extremism – and we need to live our lives not in a series of separated, segregated communities but as one truly United Kingdom.

If people want to live in a segregated community, then they should live elsewhere.

Since the emergence of the threat from Islamist-inspired terrorism, our country has made significant progress in disrupting plots and protecting the public.

But it is time to say enough is enough. Everybody needs to go about their lives as they normally would. Our society should continue to function in accordance with our values. But when it comes to taking on extremism and terrorism, things need to change.

As a mark of respect the 2 political parties have suspended our national campaigns for today. But violence can never be allowed to disrupt the democratic process. So those campaigns will resume in full tomorrow. And the general election will go ahead as planned on Thursday.

As a country, our response must be as it has always been when we have been confronted by violence. We must come together, we must pull together, and united we will take on and defeat our enemies.”

I hope the UK emerges from the election with a strong Government.