Defeat snatched from the jaws of Victory.

The above image, is of some of the most stupid young men in Britain. These balaclava wearing half wits diverted the attention of the British and the world’s public away from the largest peaceful public demonstration staged in the UK since the Iraq war back in 2003. Some estimates put the number of people involved – in the peaceful demonstration – at up to half a million! Mainly public sector workers, students and their families.
These good people protested in a peaceful and orderly way to the dubious highlight – a speech by Mr. Ed Miliband!
The violence was organised by a new left wing anarchist group UK Uncut. They have of course completely diverted attention from the peaceful and orderly protest. The aggravated trespass and criminal damage this group caused to such as Fortnum & Mason, the Ritz Hotel and the banks was utterly self defeating! In doing such, they succeeded in completely nullifying the effect of the protest.
Why? Because in this global, interconnected age of 24/7 rolling news the attention of the mass of the public is short. Yesterday will be remembered by the vast majority of the British public by images such as the balaclava wearing half wit above.
Let us now consider what a political disaster this has been for the TUC and the Labour Party. To get half a million people onto the streets of London is a colossal achievement.
If the British Weights & Measures Association had succeeded in getting half a million Britons to march against the planned elimination of our customary weights and measures and the imposition of the alien metric system the BWMA committee would be ecstatic! If however the protest was hijacked by a direct action group such as ARM who smashed up a good part of the West End (not that ARM would ever do such!) we would be absolutely gutted! The writer knows this as they are on the BWMA committee!
Therefore, out of sympathy for the organisers of the march let us examine the argument against the public spending cuts:
The first question to ask is this: Does the deficit need to be reduced, and if so by how much and how fast?
Our dearly beloved Mr Miliband suggests that the deficit can be reduced at a slower pace and that the cuts need not be so deep. Unfortunately it seems that poor Mr Miliband is as deluded about Britain’s place in the world economy as he is about the effects of CO2 on the planet Earth! Mr Miliband appears to be wandering under the extraordinary delusion that the UK is in 1911 and not 2011! We are surprised that he did not turn up to yesterday’s meet wearing a top hat, frock coat, wing collar and spats! You see, he is saying that the UK should copy the Obama administration’s policy of deficit reduction! He seems unaware that the US economy is in a unique position – one the British economy had not shared for over a hundred years!
The reason why the USA can borrow on such a gigantic scale is because the US $ is THE reserve currency of the world. The UK long ago lost any such position. This of course is the reason why the EU has pushed ahead with the Euro – an attempt – unsuccessful – at establishing a second world reserve currency extending to the EU the benefits enjoyed by the USA.
The unpleasant facts are this: because of the two disastrous world wars fought by this country in the twentieth century the UK is now a relatively prosperous modest nation off the coast of Europe. In our reduced circumstances we have to run an economy to the more rigorous standards demanded by international financiers.
Mr. Miliband may not like this. In this, he and the British Gazette are in agreement. The British Gazette however realises that what is done is done. We cannot put the clock back. We cannot go back in time and stop the Asquith government taking the fateful decision of declaring war on Germany when her troops crossed the Belgian frontier in August 1914. We are where we are.
The second question to ask is this: Given the deficit needs to be reduced in both scale and the timing, to what extent should public spending cuts play?
Many trade unionists and those of the left of British politics are of the opinion that in place of public spending cuts, tax rises should be the way out of this mess. In this, the British Gazette has considerable sympathy. However, many on the British left are deluded into thinking that this can be painless for the vast majority to Britons and that the rich, the tax avoiders and the banks can be made to pay. This of course is what the anarchists at UK Uncut believe.
This belief however is factually wrong. Let us address the specifics of just how the TUC suggest that this could be done:
The TUC suggest that the UK adopt the policy of the USA by taxing citizenship. Thus Sir Philip Green would have to pay UK tax on his worldwide income wherever he chose to live and for how long. Nice idea but it won’t work! Sir Philip would avoid this tax bill via the simple expedient of renouncing his UK citizenship and adopting the citizenship of another state. In this he would be followed by many other wealthy Britons! Oh, but why does the USA not suffer similarly? Many will ask. Answer: the USA does but to a far lesser degree due to the fact that US expats pay US Federal tax but not State taxes.
The TUC then suggests action on tax havens. Abolish them! They say, particularly such as the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands!
Oh Dear! Here we go again! This is another case of Mr Barber this time, believing himself to be living in 1911 and not 2011! The British Gazette wonders if yesterday Mr Barber had considered wearing a top hat, frock coat, wing collar and spats!
Let us then consider precisely what would happen if there was a sudden change of government following a collapse of the coalition and Mr Miliband was Prime Minister and decided to introduce legislation incorporating the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands into the UK, for them to be subsequently accorded the status of unitary local authorities and there to be three new parliamentary constituencies established; Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. That Mr Miliband also introduces US style citizen taxation as well.
The result would be disastrous! The government and parliaments of Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man would immediately declare UDI and request that the United Nations send observers to oversee referendums on becoming independent nation states! Would this succeed? Yes, of course it would because the UN would immediately refer it to the U.N. Special Committee of the 24 on Decolonization. As of June 2010, the members were: Antigua and Barbuda, Bolivia, Chile, Congo, Côte d’Ivoire, Cuba, Dominica, Ecuador, Ethiopia, Fiji, Grenada, India, Indonesia, Iran, Iraq, Mali, Nicaragua, Papua New Guinea, Russian Federation, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Sierra Leone, Syrian Arab Republic, Timor-Leste, Tunisia, Tanzania and Venezuela!
To those who might be tempted into believing that these three dependencies could not achieve this, the purpose of this committee is to achieve decolonisation. Furthermore, Nauru, the smallest nation and smallest republic in the world. Area 8.1 sq miles, population (July 2010 estimate) 9,322, sets the precedence: the three dependencies are all larger in terms of land area and population than Nauru.
Having achieved independence the countries would join EFTA and continue to enjoy the benefits they currently enjoy! The likes of Sir Philip Green would of course seek to become naturalised citizens of one of these!
Thus, if tax hikes are going to replace public spending cuts, it is the majority of the British people who will have to bear them!
Sorry to be the bearer of bad news but as adults we have to face the harsh realities of life!