• “It wasn’t me Miss! It was him!”

      0 comments

    Above, is Sister Charity IHM a teacher at the Immaculate Heart of Mary Preparatory School in Namong-Offinso, Ghana. Sister Charity is one of the few teachers at the school who does not use the cane – except as a pointer.

    The above image serves to illustrate the vast differences between nations and societies and also the way times have changed.

    Another example sits on my desk as I type this article. It is issue #6395 (18.08.17) of The Church of England newspaper. The subscriber – an elderly gentlemen – gives this to me rather than put in in his recycle bin. The headline of #6395 (Evangelicals predict split over same-sex relations) is of no surprise to me whatsoever. This is because in the couple of years I have been receiving this weekly the topic of “same sex marriage” features in virtually every issue.

    Thus there is another contrast between the Republic of Ghana where homosexual acts are illegal and corporal punishment of school children is legal and the UK where the opposite is the case!

    Many British Gazette readers, like it’s Editor will remember and will have lived through the time when corporal punishment of school children was a regular occurrence. They will of course be of a certain age. To our younger readers the phrase “the past is a foreign country, they do things differently there” applies. One of those who will remember “the cane” will of course be none other than Comrade Corbyn himself!

    One of the things we can point out to our younger readers is that the memory of “the cane” stays with you even if you never received it. You can also be sure that the memory will have figured prominently in Comrade Corbyn’s mind when he and Keir Starmer agreed Labour’s new approach to the Brexit negotiations heralded in such as yesterday’s Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/global/2017/aug/26/labour-calls-for-lengthy-transitional-period-post-brexit?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+main+NEW+H+categories&utm_term=241183&subid=15907465&CMP=EMCNEWEML6619I2
    You see, Labour’s objective is clearly that of attempting to manoeuvre itself into a position that when things go wrong it can in fact say to a very angry British electorate, “It wasn’t me Guv! It was them!”

    Doctor Richard North has applied his usual rigour to an analysis of Labour’s pronouncement.
    GOTO: http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86585
    As Doctor North points out, Labour is still some way from articulating a practical course of action to pilot the country from the quagmire it has entered. As Doctor North himself replied in a comment to one of the comments to his own blogpost: “Labour’s position on Brexit is: ‘we are going to ignore the real issues being discussed in Brussels and instead indulge in vacuous irrelevances which give us a profile in Parliament, because that’s where we are comfortable’”.
    British Gazette comment: What is clear is that if the Labour front bench were not aware of the dangers facing the UK before, they certainly are now!
    Even at this very late stage, the problem government ministers are grappling to come to terms with is this: How do we deliver what the British People voted for?

    They have sought to answer this (correctly) by asserting that the British People voted to:
    1. Leave the European Union.
    2. Not be subject to the European Court of Justice.
    3. To “bring back control” of it’s borders and immigration policy.

    These three key objectives have so far defined the government’s position as the UK NOT remaining in the “single market” post Brexit – but with some fraying at this hard edge in relation to the “transitional agreement”.

    The government’s problem is that so little progress is being made that running out of time becomes an increasingly likely prospect as each day passes.

    The danger of this position to the UK is clearly obvious.

    There is the danger that the EU may “give up” hoping for an agreement and will begin preparing for the effects of a crash Brexit. Thus it is likely the case that in the back offices of Brussels (and Berlin) plans are being drawn up for an “Emergency Measures” to be put in place and an “Emergency Package” to be offered to the newly elected UK government that would emerge within two months of 29th March 2019 WERE a train crash Brexit to take place. The EU’s “Emergency Package” would be re-entry into the EU and entry into the Eurozone!

    You will have noticed Dear Reader the word, “were” is in uppercase.

    This is because there is a problem with Doctor North’s impeccable research and argument. At the very core of Doctor North’s logic is the assumption that the government is acting foolishly. That they are ignorant of the seriousness of the consequences of a train crash Brexit.

    The British Gazette has in the past suggested that government ministers are either fools or frauds (not both as one rules out the other)

    There is another possible explanation: that government ministers are gamblers. We shall find out in 215 days time when on Thursday 29th March 2018, the Government would have to give notice – which could need Parliamentary approval – to leave the EEA. The Government’s stated position is that it does not need to trigger formal exit procedures as leaving the EU will automatically mean that our EEA membership will lapse.

    Could it be that as a train crash Brexit approaches the government will pull a very peculiar white rabbit out of the top hat of say Jacob Rees-Mogg?

    That the government could reverse it’s position and state that they were being “economical with the actualité” insofar as EEA membership was concerned and would insist that it was “business as usual” at Dover and other posts on Saturday 30th March 2019?

    Alternatively, and possibly more likely, the government might wait for someone (Gina Miller?) to take action in the courts to ensure that the UK remains in the Single Market. This would mean that the government would hope not receive so much opprobrium for having to remain in the single market and accept the free movement of people.

    That this might be in fact THE CASE is borne out by some evidence. It would explain why the government are not seriously negotiating and are “just pissing about”.

    IF it is, the government is taking a HUGE gamble. This is because it depends on the reaction of the EU. The government is gambling on the EU’s acceptance of a fait accompli and it’s agreement to negotiate a “deep and comprehensive free trade” agreement without the pressure of the time clock of Article 50.

    The problem for HMG is the same with any other gambler who “bet’s the farm” as our US friends like to say. If they win the bet they are winners. If they loose however, they have lost everything!

    Many people admire those who gamble everything. They say that they are courageous.

    Many people deprecate those who gamble everything. They say that they are reckless.
    The British Gazette agrees with both. Those who gamble everything are both courageous and reckless.

    Here is a thought: The next time you see a man driving (or being chauffeured in) a Rolls Royce Phantom OR you see a man sleeping rough on the streets, think this: that this man might well have been the other man if that giant gamble they made had turned out differently.

    The difference between these two men and the Tory government is that the Tories are not just gambling with their own political careers, they are gambling with our well being!

    One thing is certain: we are living in interesting times!

    Furthermore, we might be seeing more of this lady:

    Write a comment