OK then, no surprise for this organ to ask for immediate exit from the EU and the EEA. But then, this is not going to happen is it?
Well, it is as about as likely as the outstanding young lady above knocking on the door asking gentlemen readers if you’d like a weekend in, well not Brighton.
So what is the least we can expect from the coterie that will have governing this vassal state of the EU for the next five years from Friday 8th May?
FIRST: A grovelling apology? I mean just look at the date!!!!! Friday the 8th May 2015! Yes, that will be EXACTLY 70 years TO THE DAY from VE Day!!!!!
Let us face it, WE KNOW what Cameron is going to be saying in those TV debates!!!!! It will be the SAME as Miliband!!!!! It will be:
“On the 8th May there will one of two people in 10 Downing Street. David Cameron or Ed Miliband.”
Now for an unpleasant (to many) FACT: What Cameron (and Miliband) are saying is essentially correct. There may well be a period of – well let us call it an interregnum – if there is what Mr Clegg likes to call a balanced Parliament – yes, Dear Reader, we know, you do not like euphemisms, but if YOU were as guilty of HIGH TREASON as is Clegg, would not you be a little “iffy” with the term, hung Parliament?
What we do know is that Natalie Bennett of the Greens, Nick Clegg of the Lib Dems or Nigel Farage of UKIP are not going to be Prime Minister at the end of the month of May.
Barring something completely unexpected, we will either have David Cameron or Ed “the Puppet” Miliband.
Miliband will of course have earned this tag name because Alex “the Puppet Master” Salmond will be pulling his strings! Of course, both these unfortunates will be answerable to the Dominatrix, Strict Mistress Sturgeon of Edinburgh! This Dear Reader is where you should feel sorry for the unfortunate Miliband, for he is a middle class schoolboy from Primrose Hill who went to Haverstock Comprehensive School – unlike the upper class public schoolboy Cameron (a descendant of King William IV) who went to Eton and therefore will have developed a taste for that sort of thing!
So what can we wish for?
Probably too much to ask for.
What we do know is that the UK faces severe problems. A continuing deficit – We are spending more than we are earning. A real and present terrorist threat – Large numbers of young Muslims have, are and will continue to travel to Syria to join the ranks of “IS” – this of course in preference to travelling to Yemen and joining the ranks of Al-Qaeda who they deem “are too warm and cuddly” for their taste.
So faced with these two dangers what do the Tory’s aided and abetted by the Lib-Dems do?
CUT expenditure on the Police! AND CUT expenditure on our Armed Forces!
Truly, those whom the Gods wish to destroy, they first make mad!
These cuts NEED to be reversed. We should be spending more on the above, not less.
As to the deficit, rather than cut further the money we spend in the NHS and Education we should increase taxes instead.
Nobody likes paying tax, but is it not better to spend pay a little more tax to live in a safer country?
OK then, you retort, “Just who is going to pay the extra tax?” You continue: “If we rack up the top rate of tax all those French millionaires now living in what in the days of the TV programme, “Come Dancing” were called “the Home Counties south” will return to France. Well, here the British Gazette is going to become rather controversial. It is going to suggest that we do something along the lines of what the Greek Finance Minister, Yanis Varoufakis (apparently a very competent fellow) seems ready to do; tackle what is known as the “black economy.”
In doing this, Mr Varoufakis has a far greater challenge than any Chancellor of the Exchequer would face because of the size of the Greek black economy – but that is another subject for another article on another day.
What should be done in the UK is to decriminalise two major sectors of the black economy that produce huge amounts of income for the criminals involved in them. These are drugs and prostitution. We will deal with drugs first.
Portugal has bravely started down this path. Decriminalisation MUST NOT mean that the state should declare that drugs are OK. No, there should be a campaign to discourage people from taking these substances, but for those addicts who do, a legal supply which prevents the spread of HIV and other diseases should be made available. This will have the effect of reducing crime as large numbers of criminals commit crime for the sole reason of funding their addiction. This in turn will free up police resources to tackle terrorism and child exploitation. These drugs can be taxed, in order to provide the NHS with money to deal with the after effects of drug addiction.
Now, prostitution. We refer you to: http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/prostitution-should-we-make-it-legal/
The above reforms will achieve the following:
1. It will reduce crime and therefore the prison population.
2. It will bring in more tax revenue.
3. It will earn the condemnation of the USA – which is why the UK persists with the failed policy of drugs criminalisation. The Reader may not be aware but in the early 1920s there was a big campaign for the UK to copy the USA (and Canada) and introduce Prohibition. This was opposed by the Treasury (because of the loss of tax) but supported by the Foreign Offuice as they knew it would help relations with the USA.
Happily the politicians of the day were made of sterner stuff than the firm of “Traitors For Hire” – Messrs. Cameron, Clegg & Miliband.